Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698940881567.pdf (South Africa)
Friday, 19 February 2021] No 21—2021] THIRD SESSION, SIXTH PARLIAMENT PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA _____________________ ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS _____________________ FRIDAY, 19 FEBRUARY 2021 _____________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS ANNOUNCEMENTS National Assembly and National Council of Provinces 1.

Classification of Bills by JTM .......................................................................................... 2 National Assembly 1.

2.

3.
2.

3.

Draft Bills submitted – Assembly Rule 276 ..................................................................... 2 Referral to Committees of papers tabled .......................................................................... 2 Introduction of Bills ......................................................................................................... 2 National Council of Provinces 1.
Membership of Committees ............................................................................................. 3 TABLINGS National Assembly and National Council of Provinces 1 1.

Minister of Employment and Labour ............................................................................... 4 2.

Minister of Small Business Development ........................................................................ 4 COMMITTEE REPORTS National Assembly 1.

2.

3.
2.

3.

Justice and Correctional Services ..................................................................................... 5 Justice and Correctional Services ................................................................................... 32 Justice and Correctional Services ................................................................................. 123 ANNOUNCEMENTS National Assembly and National Council of Provinces The Speaker and the Chairperson 1.
Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) (1) The JTM in terms of Joint Rule 160(6) classified the following Bill as a section 76 Bill: (a) Animals Protection Amendment Bill [B 1 – 2021] (National Assembly – sec 76).

National Assembly The Speaker 1.

Draft Bills submitted in terms of Assembly Rule 276(2) (1) Ease of Doing Business Bill, submitted by Mr H C C Krüger, MP.

2.
2.

Referral to Committees of papers tabled (1) The following paper is referred to the Joint Standing Committee on the Financial Management of Parliament for consideration: (a) Monthly Financial Statements of Parliament – January 2021, tabled in terms of section 54(1) of the Financial Management of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, 2009 (Act No 10 of 2009).

3.
3.

Introduction of Bills (1) Dr P J Groenewald, MP 2 (a) Disaster Management Amendment Bill [B 2 - 2021] (National Assembly – proposed sec 76) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 43834 of 23 October 2020.]

Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Government and Traditional Affairs of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160.
In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of the Bill may be submitted to the JTM.

The Bill may only be classified after the expiry of at least three parliamentary working days since introduction.

National Council of Provinces The Chairperson 1.


Membership of Committees (1) The following changes have been made to the membership of Committees in the Council: Select Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Water and Sanitation and Human Settlements (Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Water and Sanitation, Human Settlements) Appointed: Hon.
Mr X Ngwezi MP (KwaZulu-Natal – IFP) Select Committee on Security and Justice (Police, Justice and Correctional Services, Defence and Military Veterans, Home Affairs and International Relations and Co-operation) Appointed: Hon.

Mr X Ngwezi MP (KwaZulu-Natal – IFP) Select Committee on Petitions and Executive Undertakings Appointed: Hon.

Mr X Ngwezi MP (KwaZulu-Natal – IFP) Joint Committee on Ethics and Members’ Interests Appointed: Hon.
Mr X Ngwezi MP (KwaZulu-Natal – IFP) Ad hoc Committee on the North West Intervention Appointed: Hon.

Mr X Ngwezi MP (KwaZulu-Natal – IFP) – alternate TABLINGS 3 National Assembly and National Council of Provinces 1.

The Minister of Employment and Labour (a) Amendment to Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of the National Minimum Wage Act, 2018 (Act No 9 of 2018).

2.

The Minister of Small Business Development (a) Revised Annual Performance Plan of the Department of Small Business Development for 2020/21.
COMMITTEE REPORTS National Assembly 4 1.

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services: Correctional Services, dated 19 February 2021.

The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, having considered the financial and non-financial performance of the Department of Correctional Services and the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services for 2019/20 and the First Quarter of 2020/21, reports as follows: 1.
Introduction 1.1 Section 5(2) of the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act 9 of 2009 requires the National Assembly, through its committees, to submit budgetary review and recommendation reports (BRRR) on the performance of national departments accountable to Parliament.
The BRR report is generally informed by a committee’s interrogation of, amongst others, national departments’ estimates of national expenditure, strategic priorities, measurable objectives and forward-funding needs; National Treasury-published expenditure reports; the relevant annual reports and financial statements; and the Auditor General of South Africa’s (AGSA) audit findings; as well as observations made during all other oversight activities.

1.2.
1.2.

The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services (the Committee) oversees the Department of Correctional Services (DCS) and the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS).
To this end, the Committee monitors the implementation of, and adherence to, policies such as the white papers on Corrections and Remand Detention; compliance with applicable legislation; adherence to principles of good governance and sound financial management; and service delivery in line with their mandates.

1 5 2.

Process followed 2.1 The year 2020 has been a difficult year for all government departments as a result of COVID-19 Pandemic.
Some of the reporting requirements have had to be postponed, including the tabling of the annual reports of departments to Parliament, which are usually tabled by 30 September each year.

2.2 On 7 October 2020, the Committee met with the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services on its Fourth Quarter Report 2019/20 and First Quarter Report 2020/21.
2.3 On 14 October 2020, the Committee engaged with the Department of Correctional Services on its Fourth Quarter Report 2019/20 FY and First Quarter Report 2020/21.

2.4 Again, the Committee engaged with the Department of Correctional Services on 2 and 4 December 2020 on the 2019/20 Annual Report with particular focus on Audit outcomes.

2.5 The Committee also received a briefing from the Auditor General of South Africa on the 1st of December 2020.
2.6 Copies of all the presentations are available from the committee secretariat.

3.

Department of Correctional Services’ strategic goals for 2019/20 3.1.
The first goal identified in the Department’s 2019/20 Annual Performance Plan was to ensure that remand detention processes are effectively managed by ensuring that remand detainees attended courts as determined by relevant legislation; are held in secure, safe and humane conditions; provided with personal wellbeing programmes; and relevant services are provided to awaiting trial persons, thus contributing to a fair and just Criminal Justice System.

3.2.
3.2.

A further goal was to ensure that all sentenced offenders are incarcerated in safe, secure and humane facilities and are provided with healthcare and effective 2 6 rehabilitation programmes in line with their correctional sentence plans to enable their successful placement into society after their lawful release.

3.3.
3.3.

The last goal was to ensure that all offenders, parolees and probationers were successfully reintegrated back into society as law-abiding citizens through provision of social reintegration programmes.

4.

Audit outcome 4.1.

The Department has, again received a qualified audit outcome for 2019/20.
Table 1: Audit outcomes between 2016/17-2019/20 Financial Total Audit Outcome Area(s) of Qualification Year number of 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 findings 373 257 204 Qualified Qualified Qualified Capital Works-in Progress Commitments Commitments and Irregular Expenditure 2019/20 214 Qualified Irregular Expenditure not fully recorded 4.2.

The Department has findings on irregular expenditure.
The Auditor-General reported that the Department did not fully record irregular expenditure in the notes to the financial statement, as required by section 40(3)(b)(i) of the PFMA.

This was due to inadequate systems to detect, record and appropriately disclose this expenditure in the financial statement.

4.3.

There has been an increase in the number of findings from 204 in 2018/19 to 214 in 2019/20.

4.4.
4.4.

The Auditor General emphasized the following: 3 7 • The Department is a defendant in various lawsuits.

No provision is made in the financial statement for liabilities.

• The Auditor-General has noted the impact of Covid-19 on the operations of the Department and the future prospects, performance and cash flows.

The AG has also noted the Department’s plans to deal with these events and circumstances.

4.5.

Performance reporting.


The programme Incarceration was audited for usefulness and reliability of information.

The report was as follows: • With regard to percentage of overcrowding in correctional and remand detention facilities: sufficient appropriate audit evidence for the achievement of 28% reported against target of 40% could not be found.

This was due to lack of accurate and complete records.
• With regard to creation of new bed spaces: reported achievement was not consistent with the planned and reported target.

The planned indicator and target was 183 additional bed spaces created through upgrading of phase 3 of the project, but the reported achievement referred to was 779 additional bed spaces created for phase 1 to 3 of the project.

4.6.

Procurement and contract management.


Contracts were extended or modified without the approval of a properly delegated official as required by section 44 of the PFMA and treasury regulation 8.1 and 8.2.

4.7.

The Auditor General highlighted the following internal control deficiencies: • Leadership did not exercise sufficient oversight regarding financial and performance information, compliance with laws and regulations and related internal controls.
• Management did not prepare regular, accurate and complete financial reports and performance reports that were always supported and evidenced by reliable information.

4.8.

Consequence management.

The Auditor General could not obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence that disciplinary steps were taken against officials who had incurred irregular expenditure as required by section 38(1)(h)(iii) of the PFMA.

4 8 5.

Mid-year performance assessment 2019/20 5.1.


For the 2019/20 financial year, the Department was allocated a total of R25, 407 638 billion.

This amount was adjusted downwards by R90, 756 million during the adjustment period to a total adjusted appropriation of R25, 316 882 billion.

5.2.

Escapes: The Department had the target of less than 0.034% (57) inmates escaping from correctional centres for the 2019/20 financial year.

In the first five months of 2019/20, only 0.007% (7) escapes were reported.

5.3.
5.3.

Assaults: The target for assaults for the 2019/20 financial year was less than 4.7% (7 824).

In the first five months of 2019/20, the percentage of reported assaults was 1.4% (2 290).

5.4.

Overcrowding: The target for overcrowding for the 2019/20 financial year was less than 40%.

In the first five months of 2019/20, overcrowding stood at 34.9%.

5.5.

Percentage of offenders participating in skills development programmes.
The target for offenders participating in skills development programmes for 2019/20 was 80%.

In the first five months of 2019/20, this target was already exceeded by 18.8% since the recorded performance was 98.8%.

5.6.

Percentage of sentenced offenders subjected to correctional programmes.

The target for inmates subjected to correctional programmes for 2019/20 was 80%.

In the first five months of 2019/20, performance was at 39.3%.

5.7.

Percentage of inmates on Anti-Retroviral Therapy.


The target for inmates on anti- retroviral therapy for 2019/20 was 90%.

In the first five months of 2019/20, performance already stood at 98.8%.

5.8.

Percentage of parolees without violation.

The target for parolees without violation for 2019/20 was 97%.

In the first five months of 2019/20, this target was exceeded since the actual performance was 98.8%.

5 9 5.9.

Percentage of probationers without violation.


The target for probationers without violation for 2019/20 was 97%.

In the first five months 2019/20, this target was exceeded since the actual performance was also 98.8%.

6.

Expenditure for the 2019/20 Financial Year.

6.1 For the 2019/20 financial year, the Department of Correctional Services had an adjusted budget of R25, 316 882 billion.

Of this amount, the Department spent R25, 186 146 billion (or 99.48%) resulting in R131 million under-spending.
6.2 The adjusted budget and spending per economic classification for 2019/20 was as follows: Table 2: Expenditure per economic classification 2019/20 Economic Adjusted Actual Percentage Available classification budget (R’000) expenditure actual (R’000) expenditure Compensation of 17 455 895 16 971 438 97,22% Budget (R’000) 484 457 employees Goods and services 6 333 621 6 811 470 107, 54% (477 849) Interest on rent and - 507 0, 00% (507) land Transfers and 821 811 877 957 106, 83% (56 146) subsidies Payment of capital 705 555 515 439 73, 05% 190 116 assets Payment of financial assets - 9 335 0, 00% (9 335) Total 25 316 882 25 186 146 99, 48% 130 736 6.3 In terms of economic classification: 6 10 • The Department recorded an under-spending of R130,736 million under Compensation of Employees and Payment of Capital Assets.
• With regard to Transfers and Subsidies, actual spending was R878 million against the adjusted budget of R821, 811 million, resulting in R56,146 million (106, 83%) over-spending.

The over-spending was a result of approved application of early retirement without penalisation of pension benefits.
• With regard to Payments for Capital Assets, there was under-expenditure of R190, 116 million mainly on the item: Building and Other Fixed Structures due to underperformance on Capital Works Programme by the Independent Development Trust and Department of Public Works and Infrastructure.

• With regard to Payment for Financial Assets, the Department spent R9,335 million against a zero budget, mainly due to write off(s) of debts and losses.

7.

Performance in 2019/20 7.1.


Overall, the Department achieved 31 of the 36 planned targets and 5 targets were not achieved.

7.2.

The following indicators were not achieved during the financial year: • Number of sites where IIMS is rolled out.

• Percentage of correctional facilities and PPP facilities inspected on conditions and treatment of inmates.

• Number of new bed spaces created through construction of new facilities.
• Number of offenders who participate in educational programmes per daily attendance register per academic year.

• Number of audit qualifications.

8.

Programme performance in 2019/20 8.1.

Programme 1: Administration 7 11 8.1.1.

The purpose of this programme is to provide strategic leadership, management and support services to the Department.

8.1.2.

The Administration programme achieved 6 (or 67%) out of 9 planned targets for 2019/20.
Table 3: Administration -Selected performance 2019/20 Performance Indicator Planned Target Actual Achievement Percentage of officials 95% charged and found guilty of corrupt activities 2019/20 2019/20 ACHIEVED 97% Number of sites where IIMS 50 NOT ACHIEVED is rolled out Percentage of correctional 41.6% facilities and community (150/360) corrections offices where LAN infrastructure is rolled out 9 ACHIEVED 41.6% Percentage of Correctional 56% facilities and PPP’s facilities (136/243) NOT ACHIEVED 53% (129/243) inspected on the conditions and treatment of inmates.
8.2.

Programme 2: Incarceration 8.2.1.

The purpose of the programme is to provide safe and secure conditions of detention consistent with maintaining the human dignity of inmates.

It is also responsible for the administration, profiling and consideration of offenders for releases or placement into community corrections.

8.2.2.

There are three sub-programmes for Incarceration: Security operations; Remand detention; and Offender management.

8 12 8.2.3.
8 12 8.2.3.

Overall, the Incarceration programme achieved seven out of eight (or 87.5%) planned targets for 2019/20.
Table 4: Incarceration - Selected performance 2019/20 Performance Indicator Planned Target Actual Achievement Percentage of unnatural 2019/20 0.032% deaths in correctional centres (53/166 449) and remand detention facilities per year 2019/20 ACHIEVED 0.029% (45/154 449) Number of new bed spaces 435 NOT ACHIEVED created through the construction of new facilities Number of new bed spaces 492 created by upgrading facilities annually Percentage of overcrowding 40% in correctional centres and (47 489/118 572) remand detention facilities in excess of approved capacity Percentage of Offender’s 92% profiles submitted by the (28 208/30 660) Case Management Committees (CMCs) that were considered by CSPB 0 ACHIEVED 1 088 ACHIEVED 30% (35 940/118 572) ACHIEVED 96% (34 228/35 509) 8.2.4.
The Department has attributed the achievement of security-related indicators to continuous implementation and monitoring of the security policies, including the escape prevention plan and assault prevention plans, as well as the death prevention plan.

9 13 8.2.5.

The Department achieved its target for assaults by intensifying management supervision of the implementation of minimum security standards, institutional orders and gang management strategy.
This has led to a decrease in the number of reported cases of assaults of inmates.

8.2.6.

The target for overcrowding in the quarter under review was achieved; however, it still remains a challenge.

The overcrowding rate was at 30 percent in this quarter.

The main contributors are growing or high levels of incarceration, insufficient accommodation and ageing infrastructure; and a high population of remand detainees.

8.2.7.
8.2.7.

The target relating to the creation of new bed spaces through construction of new facilities was not achieved.

The Department planned to create 435 bed spaces at Tzaneen Correctional Centre.

However, no bed spaces were created.

In order to address this, the Department indicates that essential works, which have been identified, will be completed in 2020/21 before practical completion can be taken.

8.3.

Programme 3: Rehabilitation 8.3.1.


Programme 3 is responsible for providing needs-based programmes and interventions to facilitate the rehabilitation of inmates and to enable their social reintegration into communities.

The programme has the following sub-programmes: Correctional programmes; Offender development; and Psychological, social and spiritual services.

8.3.2.

Overall, the programme achieved 9 out of 10 planned targets for the year under review.
Table 5: Rehabilitation - Selected performance in 2019/20 Performance Indicator Planned Target Actual Achievement Percentage of sentenced 2019/20 80% offenders subjected to (86 916/108 639) correctional programmes per year 2019/20 ACHIEVED 99% (94 694/95 747) 10 14 Performance Indicator Planned Target Actual Achievement Percentage of offenders 80% (Long skills) 2019/20 2019/20 ACHIEVED participating in skills 80% (Short skills) 99% (Long skills) development programmes 80% (TVET colleges) 97% (Short skills) measured against the number of offenders enrolled per Financial Year 99% (TVET colleges) Number of offenders who 10 527 NOT ACHIEVED participate in Education programmes per daily attendance register pre academic year.
10 411 Percentage of inmates who 19% are involved in psychological (31 625/166 449) services per year.

ACHIEVED 33% (50 353/154 449) 8.3.3.

Selected achievements include: • The Department successfully placed 94 694 (99%) sentenced offenders with Correctional Sentence Plans through various correctional programmes.

• Offender participation in long skills programmes in the Fourth Quarter of 2019/20 were 3 981, while those participating in short skills programmes were 10 106.
A further 9 764 offenders participated in TVET programmes.

• A total of 167 680 offenders participated in spiritual services, 50 354 participated in psychological services and 112 267 offenders, probationers and parolees were involved in social work services.

8.4.

Programme 4: Care 8.4.1.

The purpose of this programme is to provide needs-based healthcare programmes and services aimed at maintaining the wellbeing of inmates.
There are two sup- programmes under the Care programme, namely Health and Hygiene Services and Nutritional Services.

11 15 8.4.2.

Overall, the programme achieved all three of the planned targets in 2019/20.
Table 6: Care - Selected performance 2019/20 Performance Indicator Planned Target Actual Achievement Percentage of therapeutic Less than 12% 2019/20 2019/20 6% diets prescribed for inmates (19 974/166 449) (9 238/154 449) Percentage of Inmates on 90% 99% Anti-retroviral Therapy (29 551/32 834) (26 783/27 076) (ART) TB (New pulmonary) cure 89% rate of offenders (1 380/1 551) 93% (502/538) 8.4.3.
The Department has ascribed the achievement of TB cure rate of offenders to effective management of patients diagnosed and compliance to treatment.

8.5.

Programme 5: Social Reintegration 8.5.1.

The Social Reintegration programme provides services focused on offenders’ preparation for release, effective supervision of offenders placed under community corrections and the facilitation of their social reintegration into their communities.
The programme has the following sub-programmes: Supervision; Community reintegration and Office Accommodation: Community corrections.

8.5.2.

The programme achieved all 6 of the planned targets for 2019/20.
Table 7: Social Reintegration - Selected performance 2019/20 Performance Indicator Planned Target Actual Achievement Percentage of parolees 2019/20 97% without violations per year (55 072/ 56 775) 2019/20 ACHIEVED 99% (52 742/53 257) 12 16 Performance Indicator Planned Target Actual Achievement Percentage of probationers 2019/20 97% without violations per year (16 674/17 190) Number of victims/offenders 7 560 participating in restorative justice programmes Number of offenders/parolees and probationers participating in restorative justice 7000 programmes Number of parolees and probationers reintegrated 72 back into communities through halfway house partnership 2019/20 ACHIEVED 99% (12 471/12 604) ACHIEVED 23 192 ACHIEVED 7 468 ACHIEVED 82 9.
Expenditure and performance for First Quarter of 2020/21 9.1.

The Department of Correctional Services was allocated R26.8 billion for 2020/21.

At the end of June 2020, total expenditure was at R5.8 billion or 21.47% of the total appropriation.

This equates to an under-spending by R892 million when compared to the projected spending plan of R6.6 billion for the Quarter.

In terms of performance, of the 31 planned targets for the First Quarter, only 17 were achieved and 14 were not achieved.

9.2.
9.2.

At the end of the First Quarter 2020/21, programme spending and performance was as follows: 13 17 • The Administration programme spent an amount of R1.05 billion (19.64%) against planned expenditure of R1.4 billion, under-spending by R325 million.
The under-spending occurred as a result of delays in the salary adjustment (R77 million); travel and subsistence and fleet services under Goods and Services due to the lockdown (R228 million); and GERMS invoices for April 2020 which were paid in March 2020 (R23 million).

In terms of performance, this programme achieved only 4 out of 8 planned targets.
Targets not achieved include: Percentage of investigation completed for reported allegations; Approved Integrated Finance and SCM Strategy; Percentage of Correctional Centres and PPP facilities inspected on conditions and treatment; and Percentage of Information Systems implemented as per the Master Information System and Security Technology Plan (MISSTP).
• The Incarceration programme spent 21.72% or R3.436 billion of the projected budget for the quarter of R3.945 billion, which resulted in under-spending of R509 million.

Among others, underspending was caused by funded vacant posts as well as outstanding payments for the 2020/21 salary adjustment.

In terms of performance, Incarceration achieved 2 out of 5 targets for the First Quarter.
The three targets not achieved relate to: Percentage of inmates injured as a result of reported assaults; Percentage of inmates who escaped from correctional facilities; and Percentage of Remand Detainees subjected to Continuous Risk Assessment.

• The Rehabilitation programme spent 20.11% or R435.2 million of the projected spending plan of R489 million.

This translated to an underspending of R54 million.
In terms of performance, Rehabilitation achieved 5 out of 9 targets for the First Quarter of 2020/21 financial year.

The targets that were not achieved relate to: Percentage of sentenced offenders with Correctional Sentence Plan (CSPs) who completed correctional programmes; Percentage of offenders participating in TVET College programmes; and Percentage of inmates receiving spiritual care services.

• The Care programme spent R590 million or 24.65% against projected expenditure of R548 million.
This translates to overspending by R15.2 million in the First 14 18 Quarter.

In terms of performance, this programme achieved 4 out of 5 targets for the first quarter.

The target not achieved relates to: Offender’s viral load.

• The Social Reintegration programme spent 22.50% or R242 million from the planned expenditure of R263 million.

This translates to underspending of R19.8 million.

In terms of performance, this programme achieved 50% (2 out of 4) of the targets for the First Quarter.
The targets not achieved relate to: Percentage of victims participating in Restorative Justice Programme; and Percentage of offenders, parolees and probationers participating in Restorative Justice Programme.

PART II 10.

JUDICIAL INSPECTORATE OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES’ (JICS) 10.1.

JICS’ Statutory mandate and mission 10.1.1.

JICS is established under section 85 of the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998 as an independent office under the control of the Inspecting Judge.
Its object is to facilitate the inspection of correctional centers and to report on the treatment of inmates and conditions of incarceration.

10.1.2.

Its mission includes the prevention of human rights violations through the monitoring of mandatory reporting systems on deaths, mechanical restraints and segregations (solitary confinement) in correctional centers.

It also maintains the independent complaints system for inmates.

10.2.

Financial Performance at the end of 2019/20 10.2.1.
For 2019/20, the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services was allocated a budget of R77.2 million.

At the end of March 2020, the total expenditure for JICS was R67.

158 million.

15 19 10.3.

Inspections, Investigations, Complaints and Mandatory Reporting in 2019/20 financial year 10.3.1.

The Inspectorate scheduled a total of 136 inspections in correctional centres across the country for 2019/20 financial year, but due to lockdown restrictions, 5 inspections could not be conducted.
JICS reported that the (5) outstanding inspections will be dealt with in their catch-up plan.

The intention is to inspect each facility at least once every two years compared to once in every three years as has been the case in the past.

10.3.2.

The Inspecting Judge conducted an inspection at Zonderwater Medium A and B on 29 January 2020.

Both Centres were found to be in good condition.

However, natural light was not sufficient in single cells.
The Inspecting Judge also found that maximum security inmates were not allowed to work in the Centre’s workshop, and there was under-staffing in the workshop.

Hence, significant number of inmates could not be trained.

10.3.3.
10.3.3.

In addition to inspections conducted by JICS, Judge Oliver of the Northern Cape High Court Division, conducted inspections in three (3) facilities, namely Kuruman Correctional Centre (2 March 2020); Upington Correctional Centre (4 March 2020); and De Aar Correctional Centre (5 March 2020).

Judge Oliver found that both Kuruman and Upington Correctional Centres were overcrowded by 27% and 20% respectively, while De Aar was not overcrowded.
Some of the complaints recorded in these inspections included: Lack of readily available medicine, staff shortages, lack of feedback from transfer requests, non-functioning parole board (in De Aar), and shortage of uniforms for both inmates and officials.

10.3.4.

In the year under review, a total of 45 investigations were conducted (compared with 33 in 2018/19).

Investigations are mostly in response to violent acts in correctional centres.
JICS mentioned a challenge in the finalization of investigations on inmate deaths.

This is as a result of delays in obtaining the medico-legal reports, such as toxicology reports, which often takes years to get depending on the province.

Gauteng is reported as a province where it can take up to six years to receive an autopsy report.

16 20 10.3.5.

The JICS recorded 437 complaints in the year under review (compared with 720 in 2018/19).
These complaints included, amongst others, transfers (92), assaults of inmates by officials (89), and parole (56).

10.3.6.

Mandatory reporting is regulated by the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998.

Mandatory reporting includes: Death of an inmate (Section 15); Segregation (Section 30); Mechanical restraints (Section 31); and Use of force (Section 32).

For the year under review, there were 96 unnatural deaths reported by DCS to JICS.
A total of 27 suicide cases were recorded with majority being from Gauteng and Kwazulu-Natal.

In addition to unnatural deaths, JICS received 335 reports of natural deaths in correctional facilities.

Again, the majority of the natural deaths were reported from Gauteng (103) and Kwazulu-Natal (75).

10.3.7.

Section 30(7) of the Correctional Services Act, 1998 provides that inmates who have been segregated may refer the matter to the Inspecting Judge, who must decide thereon within 72 hours.
The JICS found that there seems to be a significant under-reporting by the Department on segregation.

For the period under review, 2 766 cases of segregation on inmates were reported.

10.3.8.

The JICS also recorded only 43 cases of Mechanical restraints in the 2018/19 financial year which is a significant decline from 315 reported cases in 2015/16 financial year.

10.3.9.

The JICS recorded a total of 358 cases of use of force in the year under review.
Again, this is a significant decline from 619 cases reported in 2015/16 financial year.

10.4.

Community and stakeholder engagement in the 2019/20 10.4.1.

In the year under review, JICS had 85 Visitors Committee Meetings out of 126 planned meetings.

Other meetings could not be attended because of lock-down restrictions.

10.4.2.

The JICS also attended a number of other meetings with other stakeholders, including JCPS meetings; a workshop with SAHRC; and a workshop at Legal Aid SA.

17 21 10.5.
17 21 10.5.

First Quarter 2020/21 Expenditure and Performance of JICS 10.5.1.

For 2020/1, the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional was allocated a total of R81.5 million.

At the end of June 2020, the total expenditure was R16.2 million excluding commitments.

10.5.2.

There was underspending by 9.24% under Goods and Services for the first quarter of 2020/21.

The reasons provided for under-spending include the nation-wide lockdown.

10.5.3.
10.5.3.

There was also underspending by 3.92% under Compensation of Employees in the first quarter.

The reason for the under-spending relates to vacant positions.

JICS has reported that a number of positions, including senior management positions, are in the process of being filled.

10.5.4.
10.5.4.

Procurement of PPE: The following items were procured: • 1000 x cloth face masks • 30 x 5lt hand sanitizers • 250 x 220ml plastic spray bottles • 250 x plastic face covers (with an adjustable headband) • 1500 x surgical gloves.

10.5.5.

In the First Quarter, JICS had 234 ICCV posts, of which, 210 were filled, 22 were vacant and 2 Correctional Centres were under construction.

In addition to ICCV posts, there were 86 approved and funded positions on the fixed establishment as at 30 June 2020.
The Inspectorate reported that 82 of these positions were filled while 4 were vacant.

10.6.

Inspections, Investigations, Complaints and Mandatory Reporting in the First Quarter of 2020/21 10.6.1.

The Inspecting Judge conducted an inspection at Johannesburg Correctional Centre on 5/5/2020, finding that COVID-19 precautions were adhered to and the Centre was 18 22 clean and neat.

However, the Inspecting Judge found that the infrastructure was old and dilapidated; and the facility was severely overcrowded.
10.6.2.

The Inspectorate reported that, for the First Quarter of 2020/21, there were only 6 investigations conducted and all of them related to deaths of inmates.

10.6.3.

Due to COVID-19 restrictions, very few complaints were received in the First Quarter of 2020/21.

10.6.4.

In terms of mandatory reporting, a total of 20 unnatural deaths were recorded for the first quarter.

The majority (14) of these were recorded as “unknown causes” and 2 were recorded as medication overdose.
In addition to unnatural deaths, JICS also recorded a total of 111 natural deaths in correctional centres across the country.

The largest category (20) of natural deaths were recorded as “Natural causes other”.

Gauteng recorded the highest number of deaths (51) while Free State/Northern Cape recorded the lowest (9).

10.6.5.

Segregation recorded a total of 1 112 reports in the First Quarter of 2020/21.
The Western Cape recorded the highest number of segregations (312), while the Eastern Cape recorded the lowest (36).

JICS reported that due to the dysfunctional electronic system of reporting, the accuracy and numbers of reports by DCS could not be verified.

10.6.6.

In terms of Mechanical Restraints’ reports, JICS recorded 14 cases for the First Quarter of 2020/21.
Reasons given for the use of mechanical restraints included: Prevention of damage to property (6); safety of others (4); safety of inmates (2); and suspicion exist of escape (2).

10.6.7.

A total of 237 cases of the use of force were recorded by the Department and submitted to JICS in the First Quarter.

JICS has emphasized that, due to manual reporting, the number of reported cases of the use of force has drastically declined.

19 23 PART III 11.
19 23 PART III 11.

Department of Correctional Services: Committee observations and Recommendations 11.1 The Committee received and accepted the Minister’s apology for being unable to attend the initial meeting as he was on sick leave, and wished the Minister a speedy recovery.

11.2 The Minister, however, attended the committee meeting on 20 November 2020 and provided a political overview on the overall performance of the Department of Correctional Services for 2019/20 financial year.
Amongst others, the Minister indicated that the filling of vacancies at senior management level was prioritized and a number of senior appointment were made.

11.3 The Minister has reported that the department is striving to improve its audit outcomes and a road-map has been adopted to address this.

The Committee will be monitoring the implementation of this road-map.
11.4 The Committee has commended the Minister for listing a number of issues that needed attention in the department, especially consequence management.

However, the Committee is concerned that most of these issues have been there and it seems as if the department is failing to address them.

The Committee request the Minister to indicate what will be done differently in the current financial year to address those issues.
11.5 The Committee notes that the Department of Justice owes money to the Department of Correctional Services which the Department of Correctional Services is unable to recover.

The Committee requests the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services to intervene on this matter.

11.6 The Department reported that it managed to achieve only 31 of 36 targets for the 2019/20 financial year.

The Committee, however, does not have the means to verify 20 24 the accuracy of this.
The Committee notes that the Department attributed the non- achievement of certain targets to the national lockdown, but as this only began on 26 March 2020, the Committee is dissatisfied by the explanation provided.

11.7 The Committee is concerned by the misalignment between the achievement of service delivery targets (89%) and financial expenditure (99.48%) in 2019/20.
The Committee will continue to monitor spending and performance on a quarterly basis to ensure service delivery and value for money in all programmes.

11.8 The Committee commends the Department for the educational and training programmes it offers.

However, the Committee notes that a limited number of children participate in educational programmes in correctional centres.
The Committee is not convinced that the Department is making enough efforts to encourage children to participate in educational programmes available in their facilities.

The Department is urged to do more in promoting access to education, especially for children in its facilities and provide the Committee with regular updates on measures taken to realise this.
The Committee further urges the Department to ensure that the budget for Rehabilitation is sufficient to ensure that rehabilitation is at the centre of departmental activities as outlined in the White Paper on Corrections, 2005.

11.9 The Department reported that, to date (12 October 2020), 12 078 low-risk offenders were released following the COVID-19 Special Parole Dispensation.
The suspension of programmes during lockdown has led to delays in further placements and, as a result, 1500 offenders were referred for further profiles.

The Committee requests the Department to provide regular updates on the release of this category of offenders on parole.

11.10 The Committee is concerned by the rate of recidivism among parolees (75 parolees were re-arrested for committing new crimes, mostly house-breaking and theft).
The Committee has consistently raised concerns about the capacity of Community Corrections to monitor those intrusted in their care.
The Committee urges the Department to intensify its monitoring programme within Community Corrections as well as to capacitate Community Corrections to ensure that there are sufficient personnel to monitor the increased number of parolees, especially now that more 21 25 inmates were released on parole during the special COVID-19 parole dispensation, to ensure that communities feel safe and are safe.
11.11 The Committee notes that the Department managed to achieve all its security-related targets at the end of 2019/20 financial year.

However, the Committee believes that the Department can do more to reduce the number of escapes and unnatural deaths that occurred in their facilities.

The Department is urged to monitor and review its security policies to ensure the safe custody of all inmates in its facilities.
11.12 The Committee notes that the Department achieved all the targets under Care programme in 2019/20 financial year.

However, the Committee notes with concern that, in the First Quarter of 2020/21, the target for Offender Viral Load was not achieved.

The Committee urges the Department to put in place measures to ensure that sick-offenders adhere to their treatment.
11.13 The Committee is concerned that the Department missed its revenue target by R45 million in the 2019/20 financial year and by R14 million in the First Quarter of 2020/21.

The Committee requests that the Department develop a revenue recovery plan to address the under-collections.

11.14 The Committee is dissatisfied about the recurrence and the increase of irregular expenditure in the Department of Correctional Services which increased from R3.3 billion (in 2018/19) to R4.4 billion (in 2019/20).
The Committee believes that the Department is not serious about preventing irregular expenditure because officials are not held responsible for this and there is no evidence of consequence management for those responsible.

The Committee requests the Department to provide a detailed report on practical steps it will take to address and prevent irregular expenditure for the current financial year and subsequent years.
The Committee further request the Department to provide it with quarterly updates on consequence management applied to those responsible for occurrence of irregular expenditure in the year under review and the previous years.

11.15 The Committee notes the report of the Auditor-General on the performance of the Department of Correctional Services for 2019/20 financial year.
The Committee is 22 26 concerned that the performance reports submitted to the Auditor General continues to require material adjustment, and this is because management did not prepare regular, accurate and complete financial reports and performance reports that were always supported and evidenced by reliable information.
The Committee is also deeply concerned by the fact that leadership of the Department did not exercise sufficient oversight regarding financial and performance information, compliance with laws and regulations and related internal controls as reported by the AGSA.

11.16 The Department’s Audit Committee reported that weaknesses in internal control still exist but the Department is currently developing an internal control framework to address those weaknesses.
The Committee requests the Chairperson of the Audit Committee to provide it with written quarterly reports detailing its findings on the Department’s performance.

The Committee is seriously concerned and questions the ability of the Audit Committee to exercise oversight over the Department of Correctional Services.
This is because, the Audit Committee reported that it was presented with regular quarterly management reports to enable it to monitor the integrity, accuracy and reliability of the performance information of the Department while the AGSA on the other hand reported that sufficient appropriate audit evidence for the achievement of 28% on overcrowding could not be found and this was due to lack of accurate and complete records.
11.17 The Committee has noted and congratulated the department through the Ministry in the opening of the Tzaneen and Nqamakwe Correctional Centres in November 2020.

However, the Committee is concerned about the time it took to complete Tzaneen Correctional Centre and the cost escalation resulting from these delays.

The Committee asked the Department to address it on whether it would be better to continue to use DPW to facilitate the infrastructure programme or to take on this responsibility in-house.
11.18 The Committee remains seriously concerned about the slow progress in the roll-out and implementation of IIMS.

This project has been delayed for a number of years and this has had a negative impact on the finances of the Department.

The Department reported that IIMS was rolled out in 9 of 50 planned sites for 2019/20.

Reasons provided by the Department included resource limitations and insufficient internal 23 27 capacity.

The Committee is not convinced by these reasons.


Therefore, the Minister is requested to update the Committee on interventions to ensure the full roll-out and implementation of the Integrated Inmate Management System.

The Committee has also committed to closely monitor the implementation of the corrective action reported by the Department which includes reprioritization of sites for deployment and the appointment of personnel.

.
.

11.19 The Committee was informed that, on 23 September 2020, Cabinet approved a draft Bill on the amendments of Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998.

The Committee has also noted that the State Law Advisor has certified the draft Bill for submission to Parliament.

The Committee has, however, expressed its concern about the time it took for this Bill to come to Parliament and is not convinced by the explanations provided for the delays in finalizing this draft Bill from the Department.
11.20 Overall, the Committee is not impressed with the performance of the Department in 2019/20 financial year and believes that there is no value for the money spent by the Department because there are no tangible outcomes that the Committee can realistically measure the Departments’ performance.

11.21 The overall pace and performance of the Department does not convince the Committee that the goals of the National Development Plan, Vision 2030 will be achieved.
11.22 The Committee urges the Department to radically change the way they do things and start doing things differently.

The Committee is not interested in processes and structures but would want to see outcomes and impact of the performance areas of the Department.

11.23 The Committee request the Executive Authority of the Department to include implementation of consequence management on the performance assessment of senior management of the Department.

12.
12.

Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services (JICS) – Committee’s Observations and Recommendations.

24 28 12.1 The Committee expressed its condolences to the family of Mr Raga on his passing and further expressed its condolences to the families of all those who have succumbed to COVID-19.

12.2 The Committee commended JICS for its presentation of the quarterly reports.

12.3 The Committee is pleased to learn that there is good working relationship between JICS and DCS.
12.4 The Committee is concerned about under-spending at JICS, which increased from R4.8 million (in 2018/19) to R10 million (in 2019/20).

The Committee requests that JICS devise a strategy on how to ensure that underspending does not continue.

12.5 The Committee notes the challenge experienced by JICS with respect to mandatory reporting as a result of the Department’s management information system continuing to be non-functional.
The Committee is concerned about the accuracy and reliability of the information available as the reports are recorded and reported manually.

The Committee urges the Minister to intervene to ensure that JICS is able to perform its statutory functions.

12.6 The Committee will engage with the Department of Correctional Services on the practice of categorizing some of the deaths in correctional facilities as ‘natural other’, which it finds concerning.
12.7 The Committee notes the number of non-nationals in our correctional facilities across the country.

The Committee will engage the Department on offender exchange programmes.

12.8 The matter of JICS’ ongoing dependence on the Department remains unresolved.

Although the Committee is aware that this issue is before the Constitutional Court, the Committee is however, concerned about the length of time this is taking.
The Committee will raise the issue of length of time for judgements to be handed down at the Constitutional Court when it meets with the Chief Justice.

25 29 12.9 The Committee notes JICS’s progress in filling its vacancies, especially at management level.

The Committee is concerned about lack of representation of people with disabilities in the organizational structure of JICS and urges it to address this issue going forward.
12.10 The Committee was disturbed to hear that an ICCV was found smuggling cigarettes during National Lockdown into a correctional facility.

The Committee views this offence in a serious light and encourages JICS to take the necessary disciplinary steps.

12.11 The Committee notes that the Eastern Cape Management Region of JICS is accommodated at the East London Magistrates Court.
The Committee encourages JICS to engage with other government departments on its accommodation needs, since the continuous leasing of property has proven to be a challenge.

12.12 The Committee notes that the national lockdown affected the achievement of some targets, especially in the First Quarter of 2020/21.

The Committee requests JICS to present its recovery plan to the Committee.

12.13 The Committee is informed that JICs is consulting the Minister on the draft Bill.
The Committee is looking forward to having sight of the Bill, as promised.

12.14 The Committee is also looking forward to receiving JICS’ report on parole.

13.

Appreciation 13.1 The Committee wishes to thank the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Deputy Minister of Correctional Services, staff in the Ministry, National Commissioner and the staff of the Department of Correctional Services for their assistance in this process.
13.2 The Committee also wishes to thank the Inspecting Judge and the staff of the Judicial Inspectorate for Correctional Services for their co-operation in this process.

26 30 13.3 The Committee wishes to thank the Auditor General South Africa for the support provided to the Committee.

Report to be considered 27 31 2.
The Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, dated 19 February 2021 The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, having considered the financial and non-financial performance information for 2019/20 and the First Quarter of 2020/21 of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, National Prosecuting Authority, Information Regulator, Legal Aid South Africa, Special Investigating Unit, South African Human Rights Commission and Public Protector, reports as follows: 1.
Introduction 1.1 The Money Bills Procedure Amendment and Related Matters Act 9 of 2009, as amended, (the Money Bills Act) requires portfolio committees to compile Budgetary Review and Recommendation Reports (BRRR) each year.
1.2 In particular, section 5(1) of the Money Bills Act provides that committees must make their assessment of the performance of national departments and institutions, with reference to the following: • The medium term estimates of expenditure of each national department, its strategic goals and measurable objectives, as tabled in the National Assembly with the national budget; • Prevailing strategic plans; • The expenditure reports or statements relating to a vote appropriating funds for such department; • The financial statements and annual report of such department; • The reports of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts relating to a department; and • Any other information requested by or presented to a House or Parliament.
1 32 1.3 Committees may make recommendations on the future allocation of resources, having assessed service delivery performance to date; evaluated the effective and efficient use of the resources already allocated; and considered the planned forward allocation of resources.

1.4 Each year, committees will ordinarily schedule meetings to prepare for the BRRR in the first two weeks of October, right after the annual reports are tabled at the end of September.
1.5 This year, the Minister of Finance extended the time-frame for the tabling of the annual reports and financial statements by two months to address the delays in compiling the annual reports on account of the Covid-19 pandemic.

1.6 However, the extension granted to Executive Authorities has affected the work of committees as they could not finalise the Budgetary Review and Recommendation Reports (BRRRs) without the audited information and financial statements contained in the annual reports.
1.7 Nonetheless, the Committee did meet with the Department, entities and institutions that fall under the Vote in October to conduct preliminary assessments of performance and expenditure for the relevant period, making use of the information that was available.

The information presented and the related observations form part of this report.

1.8 Once the annual reports were tabled, the Committee met with the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services on 20 November 2020.
1.9 The Committee also met with the Auditor General South Africa on the audit outcomes for Vote 25: Justice and Constitutional Development on 17 November 2020 and was briefed by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development on 18 November 2020.

2 33 1.10 Copies of all the presentations made are available from the committee secretariat.

2.

Mandate 2.1.
2.

Mandate 2.1.

The Committee oversees the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (the Department) and other entities and institutions that receive their allocation under the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote (Vote 25).

These include the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), Legal Aid South Africa and Special Investigating Unit (SIU).
The Vote also contains the allocations to the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and Public Protector South Africa (PPSA), both established in Chapter 9 of the Constitution as State Institutions Supporting Constitutional Democracy.

2.2.

The Department is directly responsible for the Administration, Court Services and State Legal Services programmes, as well as the Justice Modernisation sub-programme found under Programme 5: Auxiliary and Associated Services.
At present, funding for the Information Regulator remains under Programme 3: State Legal Services.

2.3.

The NPA appears as Programme 4 under the Vote.

Notably, despite the Constitution guaranteeing the NPA’s prosecutorial independence, the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998, provides for the Director General: Justice and Constitutional Development to be its accounting officer.

2.4.
2.4.

Programme 5 contains allocations to various auxiliary and associated services, including transfer payments to Legal Aid South Africa and the Special Investigating Unit (SIU), as well as to the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and the Public Protector South Africa (PPSA).

3 34 3.

Context 3.1.


Consideration of financial and non-financial performance takes place in the context of the declaration of a state of national disaster on 15 March 2020 as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, followed by the announcement of a hard lockdown from 26 March 2020.

From 1 May 2020, Government has cautiously eased restrictions, adopting a risk-adjusted strategy.

3.2.
3.2.

In addition, since the Minister of Finance tabled the Budget in February, Government announced a R500 billion economic and social support package to help battle the impact of the coronavirus pandemic.

There was also a massive reprioritisation of funds across government.

Consequently, a special appropriations bill was tabled on 24 June 2020 affecting the Vote.

In October 2020, the AENE provides for further downward revisions.

3.3.
3.3.

Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans, which were drafted prior to the declaration of a state of national disaster, had also to be adjusted to reflect the new circumstances and have since been re-tabled.

4.

Overview of key policy and operational developments 4.1.

In 2019/20, the 6th Administration focused largely on wrapping up the work of the 5th Administration, while developing new five-year strategic plans to take effect from 2020/21 that address the priorities of the new administration.
4.2.

The Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) 2019-2024 identifies seven priorities and related interventions.

Justice has particular responsibilities in respect of two priorities: namely Priority 1 ‘A capable, ethical and developmental state’ and Priority 6 ‘Social cohesion and safe communities’.

4 35 4.3.
4 35 4.3.

In addition, the MTSF identifies a lack of access to resources and opportunity for Women, Youth and People with Disabilities as cutting across all sectors, requiring a variety of interventions, including legislative amendments.

4.4.
4.4.

Key interventions for which the Justice Department is allocated responsibility for the MTSF period include: • Instituting a programme to prevent and fight corruption in government in partnership with anti-corruption agencies and non-state actors to resolve reported incidents of corruption in the Government through disciplinary measures and criminal interventions.
• Coordinating engagements between the leadership of the executive, legislature and judiciary in order to develop a social compact by 2021 and implement the compact by 2024.

• • Developing a system to ensure consistent barrier-free access to justice for persons with disabilities across the justice value chain.

Coordinating the Implementation of the National Action Plan (NAP) to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
• Establishing Specialised Commercial Crime Courts (SCCC’s) in five (5) provinces (Limpopo, North West, Mpumalanga, Eastern Cape and the Free State).

• Ensuring an efficient, modernised and co-ordinated criminal justice system through integrated digital information systems.

4.5.

When introducing the budget on 18 May 2020, the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services referred to the following priorities: • Addressing vacancies in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development.
In order to build a capable estate, critical vacancies are to be filled by year-end.

• Addressing audit and investigative findings.

The findings of the Auditor General and SIU, as well as those of other oversight bodies, will be acted on.

5 36 • Replacing colonial/Apartheid era justice-related legislation.

Such legislation will be reviewed, repealed and replaced.

In the 2020/21 financial year, the Department will begin the process of reviewing the Criminal Procedure Act, 1977.
• Strengthening land justice.

There is a process to transfer the legal representation function and related budget currently undertaken by the Land Rights Management Facility in the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development to Legal Aid SA.

This will place Legal Aid SA at the centre of the efforts towards land justice in South Africa and the transfer will ensure that Legal Aid SA has both the finances and capacity that is required.
Further, a Land Court Bill is to be introduced this year.

The Bill will broaden the mandate of the Land Claims Court and allow the appointment of permanent judges to enable the court to effectively adjudicate in land disputes in this country.

• Transforming the State Legal Services.

The State Attorney Amendment Act, 2014, was operationalised in February 2020.

As an interim measure, an Acting Solicitor-General has been appointed.

• Addressing Gender-based Violence and Femicide.


The Department is preparing three bills proposing amendments to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act, the Domestic Violence Act, and the Criminal Procedure Act.

Rollout of sexual offences courts and Thuthuzela Care Centres will continue.

• Building constitutionalism and respect for human rights and the rule of law.

Next year, 2021, marks 25 years since the adoption and final certification of the Constitution.
Programmes will be put in place to observe this milestone.

In the next five years, efforts will be made to increase and deepen constitutional and human rights awareness.

• Achieving modernized, accessible courts and people-centred services.

ICT infrastructure will be prioritised so that it can be responsive to the digital transformation initiatives and improved service delivery.

Digitising legal processes by, for example, E-filing, is at an advanced stage.

6 37 • Improving child maintenance services.


Although there have been improvements in the processes relating to maintenance applications, the Department plans to improve speed and efficiency in finalising maintenance orders.

Similarly, the finalisation of cases involving children are prioritised.

• Establishing a single judicial system.

The Constitution mandates the establishment of a single judicial system that is in line with the provisions of section 166 of the Constitution.
The introduction of Bills to replace the Magistrates Act, 1993, and the Magistrates’ Courts Act, 1944, remains a priority for 2020/21.

The Department will intensify support to the Magistrates Commission in the filling of vacant offices of magistrates to further strengthen capacity in the lower courts.

• Digitising and automating the Masters' office.


The digitisation and automation of insolvency registrations and appointments began in 2019/20 and it is envisaged that Trust online services will be implemented in 2021/22.

4.6.

Impact of COVID-19 on functioning of the courts and service delivery: 4.6.1.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to affect the delivery of justice services.
Although the courts remained open throughout the lockdown period, only services relating to the essential functioning of the courts were permitted at the start of the lockdown and, as a result, most matters were postponed.

From 4 May 2020, the Directions relating to the Courts adopted a phased return to full functionality as the restrictions eased.

4.6.2.
4.6.2.

However, service delivery is interrupted whenever a case of Covid-19 is reported, as the affected courts and offices must be closed for decontamination.

4.6.3.

This has resulted in a significant increase in backlog cases, especially in District and Regional Magistrates Courts.

The Department has initiated a 7 38 Criminal Case Backlog Plan with the participation of stakeholders to address the backlogs.

5.
5.

Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report (BRRR) October 2019 and Minister of Finance’s response to Parliament 5.1.
In the Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report (October 2019), the Committee made a number of observations, including: Table 1: Overview of Committee’s observations contained in the October 2019 BRRR Issue Audit Observations outcome - • The Committee was dismayed that the Department Department of Justice and received a qualified audit outcome for the third Constitutional Development consecutive year.
• The Committee identified vacancies, especially in senior management and in critical occupations, such as the supply chain management and finance, as having been a significant factor in the unfavourable audit outcome.

• The Committee urged the Department to address its vacancies.

Irregular expenditure and • The Committee expressed concern about the sharp wasteful and fruitless increase in irregular expenditure.
expenditure • The Committee noted that much of the irregular expenditure is under investigation.

Policy on the design of the • The Policy on Judicial Governance was submitted to judicial governance and Cabinet in March 2019.

Once Cabinet approved the court administration model Policy, the Minister planned to consult with the Chief 8 39 Issue Observations and Policy on Lower Court Justice on the proposals to reach agreement on a Reform framework for the implementation.
• The Committee noted that the finalisation of the Policy on Lower Courts Reform formed part of the Department’s annual plan for 2019/20.

• The Committee requested the Department to report on progress quarterly.

Integrated Criminal Justice • A framework was presented to the Directors-General Strategy (ICJS) of the JCPS Cluster.

• The next step was to develop an implementation plan for submission to Cabinet.

• The Committee requested the Department to report on progress quarterly.
Integration of IT systems • The Committee requested the Department to report (IJS) on progress quarterly.

• A dedicated briefing would be arranged as soon as the programme permitted.

Court infrastructure • The Committee noted the Department’s written progress report on its infrastructure projects, dated 30 August 2019.

• The Committee requested the Department to report on progress quarterly.

• A dedicated briefing would be arranged as soon as the programme permitted.
Transformation of State • The Committee noted the Department’s written Legal Services progress report on its initiatives to transform State Legal Services.

• Details of the plans to address the procurement of state legal services were included in the report.

9 40 Issue Observations • A dedicated briefing would be arranged as soon as the programme permitted.
A transformed legal • The Committee observed that practitioners continue profession and briefing to complain that they lack work to sustain viable patterns practices despite initiatives to transform briefing patterns.

• The Committee intended to arrange a stakeholder engagement on this topic.

Sexual offences matters • The Committee noted that the Department had tabled the 2018/19 Report on the Implementation on the Criminal Law Sexual Offences and Related Matters Act.
• A dedicated briefing would be arranged as soon as the programme permitted.

Master’s Office • The Committee was informed of some of the challenges found at the Master’s Offices in Cape Town, Johannesburg and Pretoria, and requested a full report from the Department.

• A dedicated briefing would be arranged as soon as the programme permitted.
NPA Strengthening the The Committee supports an independent prosecuting independence of the NPA authority but needs to fully understand the scope of what is involved.

Measuring the impact of The Committee looked forward to the new planning performance cycle in which the NPA intended to introduce impact measures.
Ethics and Accountability The Committee welcomes the NPA’s intention to mechanism introduce an Ethics and Accountabilty mechanism as 10 41 Issue Observations provided for in section 22 of the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998.

Gender-based violence • The Committee noted the need for specialist prosecutors to prosecute sexual offences cases and for revitalised TCCs.
• The Committee noted the high vacancies at the TCCS, in particular for site co-ordinators, victim assistance officers and case managers.

• The Committee understood that R1.1 billion was to be reprioritsed within government to address gender- based violence; and requested a written report on the breakdown of funds that are to be made available to the NPA for this priority.
Information Regulator Commencement of POPIA • The Committee was concerned by the slow pace at which capacitation of the Information Regulator is taking place.

Worldwide, data protection legislation is seen as a key component in securing information.

• The Committee also noted the significant cost of data breaches.

• The Committee requested the Ministry to continue to provide all the necessary support to assist the Informatiom Regulator in its efforts to get up and running.

Legal Aid SA Civil work.


The Committee noted that the proposed cuts in funding put the civil work undertaken by Legal Aid SA at risk.

SIU Legislative amendments The Committee noted that the SIU intended to bring legislative amendments to its enabling legislation that 11 42 Issue Observations will provide it with a clear legislative mandate to address its funding model; undertake pre-proclamation investigations; and monitor and enforce remedial measures.
In addition, legislative amendments are required so that the SIU can provide the services/undertake the functions envisaged by the organisational review.

Debt recovery The Committee noted the ongoing difficulties that the SIU has recovering monies owed to it for its services (The amount owed by state institutions stood at approximately R500 million).
Memoranda of • The Committee noted the announcement of a co- understanding and referral operation agreement between the SIU and the of matters to the NPA Financial Intelligence Centre in June 2018.

• The MOU with the NPA was being reviewed to address certain legal issues that arise when matters are referred.

Special Tribunal The Committee welcomed the announcement that the Special Tribunal was finally operational.
Investigations The Committee welcomed the SIU’s report on the progress of investigations at the Office of the State Attorney; and in connection with the construction of various courts and the acquisition of land for the Mpumalanga High Court and related payments.

Equity targets The Committee noted the SIU poor performance with regard to equity targets, especially with respect to women employees in the professional qualified category and persons with disabilities.
SAHRC 12 43 Issue Observations Non-responsiveness of • The Committee noted the SAHRC difficulties in state institutions obtaining responses from departments and other state institutions.

• The Committee would raise the need for a mechanism to assist Chapter 9 institutions where state insitutions are unresponsive to requests for information and/or ignore the recommendations made in their reports with the Speaker.
PAIA Annual Report The Commission had tabled the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000, Annual Report 2018/19, which was referred for consideration and report.

The Committee would engage with the Commission on the Report as soon as the programme permitted.
National Preventative • The Commission was appointed to co-ordinate the Mechanism National Preventative Mechanism established in terms of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

• The Committee noted that the Commission had received a small budget from the Justice Department for 2019/20 for this purpose and supported additional funding for this new mandate going forward.
Moot Court competition The Committee noted that the Commission was to host the Schools Moot Court Competition to promote public awareness of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in schools.

However, the competition was at risk as a result of the proposed budget reductions.

Promotional mandate The Committee noted the Commission’s funding constraints and the lack of capacity, especially with respect to its advocacy mandate, as concerning.
PPSA 13 44 Issue Backlogs Observations The Committee requested that the the PPSA provide a breakdown of its backlog cases, including the number of these cases, when the complaint was lodged and the nature of the complaint.

Security • The Committee was concerned that only one of the PPSA’ s offices has security.

• Given the nature of the work that the PPSA undertakes, this item should be adequately funded.
Lack of co-operation from The Committee would raise the need for a mechanism to state institutions assist Chapter 9 institutions where state institutions fail to co-operate or respond to findings with the Speaker.

Quality Assurance The Committee noted the Deputy Public Protector’s mechanism advice that a quality assurance mechanism be reinstated at the PPSA.
Although the Committee appreciated the Public Protector’s concern to stay within budge, every effort should be taken to ensure that reports are water- tight.

Furthermore, the chances of being successfully taken on review would be considerably reduced.

5.2.

In particular, the Committee expressed concern about the consequences of possible budget cuts for service delivery.
The Committee was especially concerned that a reduced staff establishment could undermine the work needed to create a transformed and responsive justice system.

5.3.
5.3.

The Report, therefore, recommended that additional funding be allocated to: • The NPA to address the shortfall in its compensation of employees’ budget; fill critical post vacancies; create capacity in the Asset Forfeiture Unit, Specialised Commercial Crimes Unit and the Office of Witness Protection; and to resume its aspirant prosecutor programme.

14 45 • Legal Aid SA to prevent it from having to cut posts and to ensure that it can maintain its civil work and assist in land claims matters.

5.4.
5.4.

In the case of the PPSA and SAHRC, the Committee recommended that zero budget reductions be applied and, further, additional funding be provided to: • The SAHRC to fulfil its coordinating role in respect of the National Preventative Mechanism established in terms of the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

• The Public Protector SA to fill vacancies, employ professional services, and improve security.

5.5.
5.5.

The Minister of Finance responded to the recommendations as follows: • The 2020 Budget provides additional funding of R1.2 billion for the MTEF to the NPA to improve prosecutorial capacity, rejuvenate the aspirant prosecutor programme and operationalise the new Investigative Directorate.

• Over the medium term, Legal Aid SA will receive additional funding.

• The baselines of the SAHRC and PPSA were not reduced over the medium term.

6.

Financial performance 6.1.

Allocation 6.1.1.


In 2019/20, the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote was allocated R21.1 billion, which included Magistrates’ salaries.

The total for programmes was R18.7 billion (compared with R17.5 billion in 2017/18).

6.1.2.
6.1.2.

Notably, the 2019 MTEF included the following increases to the baseline: 15 46 • R853 million was shifted from SAPS’ Integrated Justice System (IJS) programme budget to Justice in order to consolidate the IJS funding (this was ring-fenced).

• An additional R300.3 million was allocated to Legal Aid SA.

• An additional amount of R272.9 million was allocated to allow the State Capture Commission of Inquiry to continue its work.

6.1.3.
6.1.3.

In 2020/21, R22.4 billion was allocated to the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote, including the Direct Charge for Magistrates’ salaries.

However, the allocation was revised downwards by -R416 million, from R22.4 billion to R21.9 billion in July 2020.

Notably, the downward revision of the allocation did not affect the MTEF baseline.

6.1.4.
6.1.4.

In October 2020, the AENE announced further downward revisions of the Vote allocation by -R886.1 million, largely from the compensation of employees’ budget, affecting all programmes.

Table 2: Justice and Constitutional Development – Allocation for the 2020 MTEF per programme Programme (R ‘million) Administration Court Services State Legal Services National Prosecuting Authority Auxiliary and Associated Services Budget 2020 MTEF 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 Final Appropriation 2 589.5 6 595.4.
Magistrates’ Salaries 2 263.7 2 550.2 2 715.6 2 816.0 16 47 Programme (R ‘million) Budget 2020 MTEF 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 Final Appropriation TOTAL 21 045.2 22 410.8 23 884.4 24 899.9 6.2.
Financial performance 2019/20 Table 3: Justice and Constitutional Development – Projected vs Actual Expenditure 2019/20 Programme Appropriation Expenditure 2019/20 2019/20 (R’million) Main Final Actual % Under/ (Over) Administration Court Services 2504.5 2 589.5 2 537.7 98% (51.8) 6 824.9 6 595.4 6 428.7 95% 166.7 State Legal Services 1 349.8 1 544.8 1 295.1 94% 249.7 NPA 3 929.1 4 143.7 4 009.2 97% 125.5 Auxiliary and Associated 4 108.8 3 917.2 3 917.2 100% - Services Magistrates’ Salaries 2 383.7 2 263.7 2 100.2 93% 163.6 TOTAL 21 100.8 21 045.2 20 285.8 96% 759.4 6.2.1.
Vote spending for 2019/20 was as follows: • An amount of R20.3 billion (or 96%) of the final allocation of R21.05 billion was spent, with an amount of R759.4 million going unspent.

6.2.2.

Key areas of underspending were: • Compensation of employees.

The under-expenditure of R293.8 million under this item can be attributed to continued vacancies.

17 48 • Payments for Capital Assets.


R257.8 million went unspent under Payments for Capital Assets as a result of delays in the implementation of the Department’s court infrastructure programme under Court Services by the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI).

• Magistrates salaries.

An under-expenditure of R163.6 million under the Direct Charge was due to vacant magisterial posts.

6.3.

Financial performance First Quarter 2020/21 6.3.1.


R4.2 billion (or 18.7%) of the allocation was reportedly spent in the First Quarter of 2020/21.

This includes spending on magistrate’s salaries, 6.3.2.

Spending for the First Quarter was R1.1 billion less than projected, mainly due to: • Lower than planned spending on compensation of employees, goods and services and buildings and other fixed structures, as a result of delays in the filling of vacant posts due to Covid-19.
• Delays in the receipt of invoices for leases and municipal services, and non-receipt of invoices for infrastructure projects from the Department of Public Works (DPW).

Part 2 7.

Department of Justice and Constitutional Development 7.1.

The Department administers three of the Vote’s programmes: Administration; Court Services, which is the Department’s core programme and consumes the majority of the Department’s budget; and State Legal Services.
Under Auxiliary and Associated Services, the Justice Modernisation sub-programme funds the JCPS Cluster projects relating to the Integrated Justice System (IJS).

18 49 7.2.

Audit outcome 7.2.1.

Audit Committee - • The end of term of the Audit Committee coincided with the retirement of the Accounting Officer whose office would have been responsible for the recruitment of the Audit Committee.

As a result, a vacuum occurred for from October 2019 to January 2020.
The non-compliance was rectified during February 2020.

• The Department is currently in the process of recruiting a long-term Audit Committee as the present arrangement ends in February 2021.

• The Audit Committee reported as follows for the 2019/20 financial year: Ø The breakdown of key controls relating to accounting of assets and contingent liabilities continues to be a concern despite some improvements.
These deficiencies contributed to the negative audit outcome and were brought to the attention of management.

Management was advised to prioritize the setting up of a task team to address the audit findings, the implementation of which will be monitored by Internal Audit and Audit Committee throughout the financial year.

Ø The Audit Committee was satisfied that Internal Audit had discharged its responsibilities as set out in the Internal Audit plan approved by the Audit Committee.
Ø Although satisfied with the content and quality of monthly and quarterly reports prepared by the Accounting Officer during the year under review, improvements are needed on certain areas as discussed with management.

7.2.2.

Auditor General’s report.


The Department received a qualified audit opinion for 2019/20 – 19 50 Table 4: Department of Justice and Constitutional Development audit outcome Audit Focus 2018/19 2019/20 Area Audit opinion Qualified on the basis of: Qualified on the basis of: • Movable tangible capital • Contingent liabilities.

assets.

Included in contingent • Contingent liabilities.

liabilities is R3.1 billion (2019: R3.7 billion) for claims against Department.
the The Department did not have adequate internal controls to estimate the likely settlement amounts for claims against the state Emphasis of Restatement of corresponding • Movable tangible capital matter figures as a result of errors in assets under investigation.

the financial statements.

These were assets of R181.4 million that could not be located during the verification processes.

• Material impairments of R1.7 billion (2019: R875 million) were reported.
This was due to long outstanding balances owed by various client departments for legal fees paid by the State Attorney offices on their behalf and poor collection practices.
20 51 Quality of Material misstatements in Material misstatements in submitted performance reporting: performance reporting: performance • In some cases, the Auditor • In some cases, the Auditor reports General could not find General could not find sufficient appropriate sufficient appropriate audit audit evidence and in other evidence and in other cases cases the audit evidence the audit evidence did not did not agree with the agree with the reported reported achievements.

achievements.
achievements.

• The Auditor General was • The Auditor General was unable to determine unable to determine whether whether any adjustments any adjustments were were required to the required to the reported reported achievements on achievements in respect of certain indicators in the two indicators in the State Court Services and State Legal Services Programme Legal Services (under the State Attorney).

programmes.
programmes.

Annual Non-compliance with the Non-compliance with the PFMA: Financial PFMA: Uncorrected material Uncorrected material Statements misstatements resulted in the misstatements resulted in the financial statements receiving financial statements receiving a a qualified opinion.

qualified opinion.

Expenditure • Effective steps were not • Effective steps were not management taken to prevent irregular taken to prevent irregular expenditure as required by expenditure as required by the PFMA.
The majority the PFMA.

The majority of of the irregular the irregular expenditure expenditure relates to non- relates to non-compliance compliance with supply with supply chain chain management management legislation.

legislation.

21 52 • Effective steps were not taken to prevent fruitless and wasteful expenditure amounting to R5 274 000.

The majority of the fruitless and wasteful expenditure was caused by Asset Forfeiture curator fees.
Payment of - invoices (accruals) Payments were not made within 30 days or an agreed period after receipt of an invoice, as required by Treasury regulations.

Procurement • Some contracts were • Some goods and services and contract extended or modified with a transaction value management without the approval of a below R500 000 were properly delegated official.

procured without obtaining • Some goods and services the required price quotations.
with a contract value above • Some of the goods and R500 000 were procured services of a transaction without inviting value above R500 000 were competitive bids and procured without inviting deviations were approved competitive bids and by the Accounting Officer deviations were approved by although it was practical to the accounting officer but it invite competitive bids.

was practical to invite • Some goods and services competitive bids.
with a contract value • Some quotations and below R500 000 were contracts were accepted from procured without obtaining prospective suppliers who the required price did not submit a declaration quotations.

on whether they are 22 53 • In some instance, persons employed by the State or in service of the connected to any person Department whose close employed by the State, as family members, partners prescribed.
or associates had a private • Some quotations and or business interest in contracts were awarded to contracts awarded by the suppliers whose tax matters department failed to had not been declared.

disclose such interest, as • The preference point system required.

was not applied in some of the procurement of goods and services above R30 000 as required.

• Some ICT-related goods and services, classified mandatory, were as not procured through SITA as required.
Revenue The Auditor General was The Auditor General was unable management unable to obtain sufficient to obtain sufficient audit Internal control audit evidence that effective evidence that effective and and appropriate steps were appropriate steps were taken to taken to collect all money due, collect all money due, as as required.

required.
required.

• The accounting officer did • The accounting officer did not effectively oversee not effectively oversee financial and performance financial and performance reporting and compliance, reporting and compliance as as well as related internal well as related internal controls.

controls.
controls.

• Management did not • Management did not adequately monitor the adequately monitor the action 23 54 implementation of action plan to address prior year plans to address internal findings resulting in similar control deficiencies.

findings in the current • Management did not financial year.
implement proper record • Management did not keeping in a timely manner implement proper record to ensure that complete, keeping in a timely manner to relevant and accurate ensure that complete, information is accessible relevant and accurate and available to support information is accessible and financial and performance available to support financial reporting.

and performance reporting.


• Management did not • Management did not implement controls over adequately review and daily and monthly monitor compliance with processing and reconciling applicable legislation.

of leave transactions.

• Management did not adequately review and monitor compliance with applicable legislation.

• Management did not implement controls over daily and monthly processing and reconciling of leave transactions.
• Management did not design and implement formal controls over information technology systems to ensure the reliability of the systems 24 55 and the availability, accuracy and protection of information.
Investigations • At the Department’s • At the Department’s request, request, an independent an independent consultant is consultant is investigating investigating allegations of allegations of possible possible procurement procurement irregularities irregularities in the risk and in the risk and security security environment for the environment for the period period 2008/09 to 2018/19.

2008/09 to 2018/19.

This • Two reports into the investigation was still in procurement processes progress.
relating to specific security • The President has related awards were issued in authorised the SIU to February 2020 and resulted investigate the Office of in disciplinary proceedings the State Attorney.

This being instituted.

These investigation, which proceedings and the covers the period 2012/13 remaining scope of the to 2018/19, is still in investigation are still in progress.

progress.
progress.

• The President of the country has authorised the SIU to investigate (i) the Office of the State Attorney (2012/13- 2018/19) and (ii) the Masters Office.

Both investigations are still in progress.

7.2.3.

This is the third consecutive year in which the Department has received a qualified audit opinion.
The Auditor General attributes the stagnation in the 25 56 Department’s audit outcome to inadequate implementation and review of the initiatives contained in the Department’s post audit action plan.

7.2.4.

The Department received one audit qualification for 2019/20 on contingent liabilities: • Significant deficiencies were identified in the accounting for contingent liabilities as has been the case for the past three financial years.
While action plans have been developed in the past, these plans have not been implemented and monitored with the necessary care.

Addressing the qualification will require collaboration between the State Attorney, Legal Services, NPA and the Finance Unit, which has not always been the case.

7.2.5.

Although the Department managed to address deficiencies in the asset management environment, this area remains a concern as R181 million of assets could not be verified during the year-end asset count.

7.2.6.
7.2.6.

The Department’s top four areas of non-compliance areas are: Quality of financial statements; quality of financial statements; procurement and contract management; prevention of irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure; and expenditure management to ensure the timeous payment of service providers.

7.2.7.

The Auditor General highlighted the Department’s difficulties/inability to collect monies for legal fees due from client departments.
The outstanding amount increased by R400 million from 2018/19 to R2.4 billion as at 31 March 2020.

This adversely affects the Department’s cash balance.

7.2.8.

Irregular expenditure by the Department decreased in 2019/20 (R563 million was identified in the current year of which R223 million relates to prior years).
However, a further R867 million of potential irregular expenditure is yet to be confirmed (R197 million relating to procurement of legal services by the state attorney; R561 million relating to allegations of fraudulent documents submitted by suppliers; the remaining transactions primarily relate 26 57 to instances where National Treasury approval for extensions/deviations was not obtained).

7.2.9.
7.2.9.

The Auditor General identifies the following as being the root causes of the Department’s poor audit outcome: • Slow or no response by Management to improving key controls.

• Instability or vacancies in key positions.

7.2.10.

The Guardians Fund, Presidents Fund and Justice Administered Fund retained their clean audit outcomes 7.2.11.
The Auditor General makes the following recommendations: To the Department - • There should be the required urgency by management in responding to messages about addressing risks identified and improving internal controls.

• Internal audit should be assigned the responsibility for tracking and verifying the progress against the audit action plan.

• Leadership stability and the right tone at the top is essential to positive outcomes.
To the Committee - • The Committee should request the accounting officer and the Minister to provide feedback on the implementation and progress of action plans to ensure improvement in the audit outcomes.

• Governance challenges between the Department and the NPA remain a stumbling block in achieving clean administration.

7.3.

Minister’s overview 7.3.1.


On 20 November 2020, the Minister addressed the Committee on the Department’s performance for the period under review, highlighting his concern about the continuous decline in the Department’s performance.

27 58 7.3.2.

The Minister attributes the decline as stemming “from the fact that over the past couple of years, a culture of underperformance and little accountability without consequences has entrenched itself.
Most concerning, the department has at times unreasonably delayed filling critical vacancies across the board”.

The Minister stated that there is a process in place to rebuild the administration.

At senior management level, the appointment of a Director- General is at an advanced stage and a Chief Master and the DDG for Corporate Services have been appointed.

7.3.3.

Senior Management was tasked with conducting a root cause analysis of the Department’s problems as part of developing a “rescue plan”.
The identified root causes within senior management are as follows: • The high levels of leadership instability.

• The lack of capacity.

• A lack of proper performance management.

• A lack of decisive decision-making.

• There is no defined organisational culture leading to a culture of non- performance.

• A lack of ethical tone.

7.3.4.


The following actions will be undertaken by the end of the 2020/21 financial year: (i) re-align the macro structure; (ii) implement corrective action and consequence management; and (iii) conduct a skills audit will be conducted to assess the skills set of our middle and senior management.

7.3.5.

Concerning the NPA, the Minister undertook to continuing “to find every Rand and Cent in the system to capacitate this institution.
Capacitating the NPA is an investment to not only regain confidence for the rule of law, but also to recoup all the monies which have been lost to corruption.” 7.4.

Non-financial performance 2019/20 28 59 7.4.1.

Overall, in 2019/20, the Department achieved 51% (or 57 of 112) of its planned indicators, compared with 73% for 2018/29.
If the indicators for the NPA are removed, the Department achieved only 49% of the planned indicators: Table 5: Department of Justice and Constitutional Development - overall performance 2019/20 Programme Percentage Actual Planned performance performance Targets Administration Court Services State Legal Services NPA 18 % 40 % 60 % 57 % Auxiliary and Associated 67% Services: Justice Modernisation Overall 51% 2 10 27 16 2 57 11 25 45 28 3 112 7.4.2.
Overall, performance steadily declined as the 2019/20 financial year progressed, particularly so for the Administration and Court Services programmes: Table 6: Department of Justice and Constitutional Development - quarterly performance 2019/20 2019/20 Quarterly performance Programme Quarter 1 Quarter Quarter 3 Quarter 4 Administration Court Services State Legal Services 2 17% 47% 67% 25% 53% 66% 14% 35% 70% 18% 40% 60% 29 60 2019/20 Quarterly performance Programme Quarter 1 Quarter Quarter 3 Quarter 4 2 Auxiliary and Associated 100% 100% 100% 67% Services: Justice Modernisation 7.5.
Programme 1 - Administration 7.5.1.

The Administration programme is responsible for the Department’s management and for the development of policies and strategies for the efficient administration of justice.

7.5.2.

In 2019/20, the Administration programme spent R2.5 billion or 98% of its allocated budget.

7.5.3.

Overall, the Programme met or exceeded 18% of the planned indicators (compared with 43% for 2018/19).
Table 7: Administration – Selected performance 2019/20 Indicators Five year Target 2019/20 Sub- Unqualified audit Unqualified Not Achieved opinion achieved (Objective indicator) Percentage of - 71% against a target of significant findings resolved on key specific issues 100% Percentage of - 99% against a target of undisputed and valid 100% programme Management 30 61 Indicators Five year Target 2019/20 Sub- programme invoices paid within 30 days No.
of priorities 3 0 against a target of 3 Corporate Services implemented to improve administrative capacity to deliver (Objective indicator) No.

of realigned - 2 against a target 5 organisational substructures substructures No.

of people - 0 against a target of 300 on and appointed internship learnership programmes Repositioning strategy - Not finalised by target for Justice College finalised by target date 31 February 2020 date 7.5.4.
Linking financial and non-financial performance information: The programme achieved only 18% of planned indicators in 2019/20 but spent 98% of the programme budget.

Performance has declined from 2018/19 where the Department achieved 43% of its planned indicators.

7.6.

Programme 2 - Court Services 31 62 7.6.1.


The Court Services programme facilitates the resolution of criminal, civil and family law disputes by providing accessible, efficient and quality administrative support to the courts; and manages court facilities.

7.6.2.

The Programme has the following strategic objectives: • An efficient and effective integrated criminal justice system that enhances public confidence in the criminal justice system.

• Enhancing a victim-centric criminal justice system.
• Enhanced and integrated Family Law services.

• Increased access to courts by historically marginalised communities.

• An efficient and effective civil justice system.

• Transformation of the South African legal system enhanced.

7.6.3.

In 2019/20, the Programme met or exceeded 40% (or 10 of 25) of planned indicators (compared with 75% in 2018/19).

Table 8: Court Services - Selected performance 2019/20 Indicators Five- year Target 2019/20 Related sub- programme or directorate No.
of criminal cases on the 47 332 NOT ACHIEVED Chief Directorate: backlog roll in Lower Court Performance Courts (Objective indicator) (57 049 against a target of <48 223) No.

of recorded criminal NOT ACHIEVED cases updated on ICMS criminal (6 292 against a target of <1800) No.
of magisterial districts NOT ACHIEVED Court Services with a supplier database for (0/25) 32 63 Indicators Five- year Target 2019/20 Related sub- programme or directorate Foreign language interpreters Percentage of victims and 60% - Lower Courts (Chief Directorate: Promotion of the Rights of Vulnerable Groups) Facilities Management witnesses satisfied with the lower court-based support services (Objective indicator) No.
of courtrooms adapted NOT ACHIEVED in line with sexual offences model (13 against a target of 16) Percentage of work in NOT ACHIEVED progress (WIP) cases updated on ICMS: NSRO 26% against a target of 90% Percentage of clients 68% - perceiving an increase in access to justice services (Objective indicator) Number of new court NOT ACHIEVED buildings completed (2 against a target of 3) No.
of courts where NOT ACHIEVED upgrading and extensions are completed (3 against a target of 6) Percentage of annexed civil 75% NOT ACHIEVED Court Services cases mediated (0 against 65%) 33 64 Indicators Five- year Target 2019/20 Related sub- programme or directorate (Objective indicator) No.

of courts providing - NOT court- annexed mediation ACHIEVED(0 against target of 34) No.

of transformational 3 NOT ACHIEVED Court Services policies developed (Objective indicator) (0 against a target of 3) 7.6.4.
Linking financial and non-financial performance information: • The Programme met 40% (or 10 of 25) of planned indicators (compared with 75% in 2018/19) while spending 95% of the adjusted appropriation.

Underspending is even higher when reprioritised funds are taken into account.

• The Department reports that vacancies affected its performance in 12 of the 15 unachieved indicators.
For the remaining three unachieved indicators, non-performance is attributed to non or slow-delivery on the part of the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure.

• Notably, none of the transformational policy frameworks or discussion documents were submitted to the Minister by the target date.

7.7.

Programme 3 - State Legal Services 7.7.1.


This Programme provides legal and legislative services to government; supervises the administration of deceased and insolvent estates; registers trusts and manages the Guardian’s Fund; and prepares and promotes legislation.

In addition, the Programme faciliates constitutional development and undertakes research in support of this.

34 65 7.7.2.

In 2019/20, the programme met or exceeded 60% of its planned indicators (compared with 86% in 2018/29).
Table 9: State Legal Services - Selected performance 2019/20 Indicators Five-year 2019/20 Related target Sub- programme No.
of Previously 1 600 ACHIEVED Litigation and Disadvantaged Individuals (1971 against a Legal Services (PDI) advocates briefed (Objective indicator) target of 1600) Percentage value of briefs - NOT distributed to PDIs ACHIEVED (82% against a target of 83%) Percentage rand value of - NOT briefs allocated of female counsel ACHIEVED (27% against a target of 29%) Percentage of briefs - NOT allocated to female counsel ACHIEVED (39% against a target of 41%) Percentage reduction of 5% reduction NOT Litigation and litigation costs against the (2019/20 based ACHIEVED Legal Services State on estimated (13% increase (Objective indicator) performance against a target 2018/19) of 5% Percentage reduction in - capital amount claimed in reduction) NOT ACHIEVED 35 66 Indicators Five-year 2019/20 Related target Sub- programme medical negligence, unlawful arrest and detention claims Percentage of litigation - cases settled (65% against a target of 97%) NOT ACHIEVED (57% against a target of 65% Project plan for repeal of 31 March 2020 NOT Legislative apartheid era legislation submitted to Minister by target date ACHIEVED Development and Law Reform Percentage of people (Baseline N/A indicating awareness on 2017/18 is the right to equality 74%) Constitutional Development (sexual orientation) as entrenched in S9 of the Constitution (Objective indicator) No.
of progress reports - submitted to National Task Team on handling of reported LGBTI hate crimes cases NOT ACHIEVED (11 against a target of 12) No of targets in the 2019/20 – NOT implementation plan for 3 initiatives ACHIEVED the NAP implemented (Objective indicator) (1 initiative against a target of 3) 36 67 7.7.3.

Linking financial and non-financial performance information: • Overall, programme performance decreased from 86% in 2018/19 to 60% in 2019/20.
Under-performance is observed in the Litigation and Legal Services and Constitutional Development sub-programmes in particular.

• Spending also decreased from 95% in 2018/19 to 94% of the adjusted budget of R1.39 billion in 2019/20, with R100 million left unspent.

• The Department reports that vacancies affected performance, as the 18 unachieved indicators are largely personnel driven.

7.8.

Programme 5: Auxiliary and Associated Services Programme - Justice Modernisation sub-programme 7.8.1.
Programme 5 contains the Justice Modernisation sub-programme which has funds for the implementation of IT infrastructure for the Department and also includes the earmarked funds for IJS integration across the Cluster.

7.8.2.

The Justice Modernisation sub-programme has the strategic objective: ‘Functional integrated criminal justice system (CJS) to monitor the performance of the criminal justice system established’.

7.8.3.
7.8.3.

The sub-programme met 67% or 2 of 3 indicators (compared to 100% in 2018/19): Table 10: Justice Modernisation –Selected performance 2019/20 Indicators 5-Year Target 2019/20 Responsibility No of KPIs on the integrated 28 ACHIEVED Justice Criminal Justice systems (Objective indicator) (26 against a Modernisation target of 26) 37 68 No.

of government departments - and entities exchanging information electronically ACHIEVED (9 against a target of 9) Total no.
of IJS departments - NOT applications that form part of integrated test lab process No.

of branches/sites/service - centres of government departments and entities where PIVA services deployed ACHIEVED (8 against a target of 9) ACHIEVED 684 against a target of 280 7.9.

Overview of First Quarter 2020/21 non-financial performance 7.9.1.

Overall, in the First Quarter of 2020/21, the Department achieved 27 of 59 (or 45.7%) of planned indicators: Table 11: Programme performance 2020/21 Quarter 1 Programme No.
of Actual % indicators with Performance Performance planned targets Administration Court Services State Legal Services NPA Justice Modernisation Total 9 14 34 12 2 71 5 5 15 5 2 32 56% 36% 44% 42% 100% - 38 69 8.

National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) 8.1.


In line with its constitutional mandate, the NPA provides a co-ordinated prosecuting service to ensure that justice is delivered to the victims of crime through general and specialised prosecutions, protects certain witnesses and removes the profit from crime.

8.2.

The NPA is a programme within the Justice and Constitutional Development Vote and the Director-General: Justice and Constitutional Development is its accounting officer.
In the past, National Treasury provided an exemption that allowed the NPA to prepare its own annual financial statements separate from those of the Department until legislation regularising the practice was enacted but the exemption expired on 31 March 2014.

However, in terms of the National Prosecuting Authority Act, 1998, the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) has submitted an annual report on operations for 2019/20.

8.3.

Strategic and operational developments.


There have been a number of developments that have impacted on the NPA’s strategic and operational environment: • In February 2019, Adv.

Shamila Batohi was appointed NDPP, filling the vacancy that had arisen from the Court judgement.
• A key government commitment in the period under review has been to intensify the fight against corruption with a focus on the swift investigation, prosecution and recovery of stolen public money, especially where evidence of criminal activity has emerged from the various commissions of inquiry.

An investigating directorate was established by proclamation in the Office of the NDPP to deal with serious corruption and associated offences on 4 April 2019. the Investigating Director, Adv.
H Cronje was appointed a month later.

The Directorate was given a specific mandate to focus on State Capture- 39 70 related corruption that emerged from the various commissions of enquiry, including the State Capture Commission led by the Deputy Chief Justice, Judge Raymond Zondo.
The Directorate is intended as a temporary and focused intervention and, therefore, strengthening capacity and skills in the Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCCU) and the Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU), which also deal with corruption, is vital.

• A further key priority/commitment has been to work to end gender-based violence.

8.4.
8.4.

For the 2020-2025 term, the NPA has aligned its strategy with the Department’s impact statement of ‘Improved public perception, confidence in the justice system and respect for the rule of law’ and to the Department’s Outcomes 2 and 7, namely ‘Modernised, accessible courts and people-centred services’ and ‘Crime and corruption significantly reduced through effective prosecution’.
The NPA has also committed to making the following impact: ‘A South Africa in which crime is significantly reduced and everyone feels safe and abides by the law’.

The intended outcome is ‘Crime and corruption significantly reduced through effective prosecution.

8.5.

The NPA’s analysis of performance trends found that, while the organisation has consistently maintained good conviction rates, it is performing less satisfactorily in terms of the actual number of convictions attained.
A key factor has been the high vacancy rate as a result of the freeze on recruitment since 2015.

Moreover, the Aspirant Prosecutor Programme was suspended.

With an additional allocation, the NPA has been able to embark on a recruitment drive to fill critical vacancies and increase capacity.

At Senior Management level, several key appointments have been made.

Adv.

R de Kock to head the National Prosecuting Service and Adv.

Rajbaji-Rasethaba to head the AFU.

40 71 8.6.

Personnel.


As at 31 March 2020, the NPA’s overall vacancy rate was 27%.

Notably, the vacancy rate for the AFU was 46%; the SOCA Unit was 38%; and the SCCU 33%.

The Table below sets out the vacancy rates for each functional responsibility.

Table 12: NPA - Vacancy rate at 31 March 2020 Functional Total Filled Vacant Vacancy Responsibility Unfunded Prosecutions 3 861 2 975 Legal Administration Support (AFU 209 156 886 53 Investigators, CPO & VAOs, etc.)
rate (%) 23% 25% Administrative Support 1 521 952 569 37% Office of Witness Protection 164 141 23 Total 5 755 4 224 1 531 14% 27% 8.7.

Financial performance 8.7.1.

The NPA was allocated R4.1 billion for 2019/20 (compared with R3.8 billion for 2018/19), and spent R4.0 billion (or 97%) of the final budget, underspending by R125.6 million.
Table 13: NPA - Expenditure report 2019/20 Programme (R’million) Final Actual (Over)/under Appropriation Expenditure expenditure National Prosecutions 3 221.1 3 215.8 5.3 Service Asset Forfeiture Unit Office of Witness 153.1 192.8 126.9 192.8 26.3 - Protection 41 72 Programme (R’million) Support Services Total Final Actual (Over)/under Appropriation Expenditure expenditure 567.6 4 134.7 473.8 4 009.2 93.8 125.5 8.7.2.
Expenditure on Compensation of Employees was at 98% (R3.4 billion) with an underspending of R62.6 million.

During the AENE process the NPA was allocated a further R102 million to establish the Independent Directorate, capacitate the AFU and the SCCU, and to increase safety, security and witness protection services with respect to the prosecution of corruption matters for the NPA The underspending is attributed to the recruitment process not being finalised in the year under review.

8.7.3.
8.7.3.

As a result of budget challenges, the Department transferred R21.5 million to address overspending under the Goods and Services budget.

Before the virement, expenditure was at 104% due to the payment of contractual obligations.

8.7.4.

During 2019/20, the Department also allocated an additional R90 million to the NPA for the replacement of outdated laptops for prosecutors.

However, the outbreak of COVID-19 prevented delivery of these laptops before the end of the financial year.
This led to underspending of R62.8 million reflected under Payments for Capital Assets.

8.7.5.

The NPA received additional funding of R1.2 billion over the MTEF through the 2019 AENE process to: establish the Independent Directorate, capacitate the AFU and the SCCU; and increase safety, security and witness protection services with respect to the prosecution of corruption matters.

8.7.6.

In 2020/21, the NPA is allocated R4.2 billion.


At the end of the First Quarter, the NPA reported spending R1.04 billion or 24.7% of the allocation.

42 73 Overspending under Machinery and Equipment relates to laptops purchased in 2019/20 but only delivered and paid for in 2020/21.

8.8.

Non-financial performance 8.8.1.

Overall, in 2019/20, the NPA achieved 17 or 61% of 28 planned indicators and collected baseline data for one new indicator.

8.8.2.
8.8.2.

At the end of the First Quarter 2020/21, the NPA achieved 6 of 12 or 50% of planned indicators.

8.9.

Linking financial and non-financial performance information.

In 2019/20, the NPA achieved 61% of its indicators and spent 97% of its budget.

The performance of the AFU was particularly poor, achieving only 2 of the 11 planned indicators for 2019/20.

The high vacancy rate in the AFU is reported as having contributed to the poor performance.
In this regard, the appointment of Adv Rajbaji-Rasethaba to head the AFU was a first step in the AFU’s turnaround strategy.

In addition, the NPA has created an additional 37 posts at the AFU and made 55 contract appointments.

8.10.

Budget reductions.

The NPA reports that the proposed budget reductions will negate the increased allocation over the MTEF intended to fill vacancies and increase the NPA’s capacity, as well as for its Aspirant Prosecutors programme.
Although the NPA can absorb the cuts for this financial year and for 2021/22, the NPA will not be able to fill positions to pay those who it has recruited now or to increase its capacity as it will have a shortfall on its salaries budget in the outer years.

The NPA projects that it will have to employ 585 fewer officials, about 10% of its present staff establishment, which will seriously undermine its ability to deliver on its mandate.

43 74 9.

Information Regulator 9.1.


The Protection of Personal Information Act, 2013, (POPIA) regulates the processing of personal information by providing a framework that sets out the minimum standards that responsible parties must comply with when processing personal information.

The Act applies to public and private bodies, including juristic persons, and aims to achieve a balance between the free-flow of information and the right to privacy.

9.2.
9.2.

The Information Regulator is established in terms of section 39 of POPIA and has a wide range of powers and functions regarding promoting and enforcing the right to privacy.

9.3.

POPIA also transfers certain key responsibilities concerning the Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000, (PAIA) to the Information Regulator.

These include the handling of complaints, conducting investigations, and making assessments about compliance by public and private bodies.

9.4.
9.4.

On 17 June 2020, the President issued a Proclamation bring into operation certain outstanding sections of POPIA on 1 July 2020.

The remaining sections will come into effect on 1 July 2021.

In terms of section 114(1), public and private bodies have until 30 June 2021 to comply with POPIA.

9.5.

The Regulator has reported that the institution has enough time to ensure its readiness before 1 July 2021 and has developed the necessary plans.
PAIA functions, however, will be transferred from the SAHRC to the Information Regulator after 30 June 2021 as soon as it becomes possible.

The SAHRC and the Regulator will jointly develop a plan of action for the handing over of the function.

9.6.

In terms of POPIA, the Regulator is given the power to determine its own administration in consultation with the Minister of Finance.

The Regulator 44 75 has an approved structure of 430 posts and plans to appoint 41 staff members in 2020/21.

9.7.
9.7.

The Regulator’s funding is ring-fenced under the Justice Departments’ State Legal Services programme.

An amount of R45.5 million is allocated to the Information Regulator for 2020/21, compared with R28.9 million in 2019/21.

The allocation for the remainder of the 2020 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) is as follows: R57.7 million in 2021/22; and R63.7 million in 2022/23.

9.8.
9.8.

The Regulator reports a shortfall on its allocated budget: it requires R84.9 million in 2021/22; R138.4 million in 2022/23; and R306.3 million in 2023/24 if it is to grow the establishment to the planned 383 employees.

Part 3 Auxiliary and Associated Services 10.

Legal Aid South Africa 10.1.


Legal Aid SA is an autonomous statutory body that derives its mandate from the Constitution, 1996; the Legal Aid South Africa Act 39 of 2014; and other legislation requiring the government to provide legal assistance to the indigent.

Its main objective is to make legal representation available to indigent persons at State expense, ensuring the right of all citizens to access to justice.
Notably, the Legal Aid South Africa Act, 2014, provides that Legal Aid SA must render or make available legal aid and legal advice; provide legal representation at state expense; and provide education and information concerning legal rights and obligations, as envisaged in the Constitution.

10.2.
10.2.

The main objective of Legal Aid SA is to render or make available legal representation to indigent persons at state expense as contemplated in the Constitution, ensuring the rights of citizens to access to justice.

45 76 10.3.

The Strategic Plan 2020-2025 sets out the policy priorities, programmes and project plans for the period, as well as the related outcomes, outcome indicators and five-year targets.
Legal Aid SA’s plans are aligned with the MTSF priority ‘Social cohesion and safer communities’: 10.4.

Legal Aid SA’s strategic outcomes for 2020-2025 are to provide quality justice for all, especially, the poor and vulnerable, and to be a respected, high performance, sustainable and accessible public entity that will have a positive impact on society, the economy and the environment.

10.5.
10.5.

In carrying out its mandate, Legal Aid SA continues to identify the following priority groups: children; every detained person, including sentenced prisoners; every accused person who wishes to appeal or review a court decision in a higher court; women, particularly in divorces, maintenance and domestic violence cases; and the landless, especially in eviction cases.

10.6.
10.6.

The Legal Aid SA Plans have factored in the new responsibility that arises as a result of government’s policy direction related to justice in land matters and the new Land Court Bill.

The Board approved the position of a Legal Executive: Land Rights Management who will be responsible for the delivery of the land-related matters legal services offering, as envisaged in the Land Court Bill.
A number of meetings have been held with the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, relating to the Land Court Bill.

The interim transfer of the Land Rights Management Facility to Legal Aid SA, pending the implementation of the Land Court Bill, has formed part of these discussions 10.7.

Budget constraints continue to affect the operations of Legal Aid SA.
The salaries budget is also negatively impacted by the cost of living increases which are higher than the macro increases and these have to be absorbed within the baseline allocation.

The operating expenditure budget has not been 46 77 increased by the macro over the five-year period, except for expenditure linked to contractual obligations.

A key area of concern is the lack of relief capacity.

10.8.

At 31 March 2020, Legal Aid SA reports a staff establishment of 2 551 with budgeted posts at 2 799.
Legal staff, including paralegals, account for 80% of the establishment.

10.9.

Legal Aid SA received Top Employer accreditation for the eleventh consecutive year.

10.10.

Delivery continues to occur nationwide through 64 Local Offices and 64 satellite offices.

In addition, Legal Aid SA makes uses of accredited Judicare partners; co-operation partners and agency agreements with private law firms to deliver services.
This ensured a mixed model delivery system in which 96% of all new matters were handled by the Local Offices; 3% by Judicare practitioners and Agency Agreements; and 1% by co-operation partners.

10.11.

In 2019/20, Legal Aid SA achieved an unqualified audit opinion for the nineteenth consecutive year and a clean audit opinion for the fourteenth consecutive year.

10.12.

Financial performance 10.11.1.

Legal Aid SA is allocated R2.1 billion for 2020/21, an increase from R1.99 billion in 2019/20.
Over the 2020 MTEF, it is allocated an additional R75 million (R20 million in 2020/21; R25 million in 2021/22 and R30 million in 2022/23).

However, anticipated budget reductions will create a budget shortfall that affects the Compensation of employees’ budget, in particular.
Table 14: Legal Aid SA programme budget for the 2020 MTEF 47 78 Sub-programme 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 (R’million) Legal Aid Services 334.8 390.5 402.1 427.4 Administration Special projects 600.3 55.8 1 656.1 1 757.8 1 833.8 59.5 63.3 66.7 TOTAL 1 991.0 2 106.1 2 223.2 2327.9 10.11.2.

Legal Aid SA reported that it spent R2.01 billion or 98% of the revised budget of R2.06 billion in 2019/20.

10.11.3.
10.11.3.

In 2020/21, Legal Aid SA’s budget has been reduced by R23 million to contribute to the Covid-19 fund.

10.13.

Non-financial performance 10.12.1.

Legal Aid SA reports the following key achievements for 2019/20: • Legal advice and assistance was provided in 668 293 matters, of which 402 238 were new criminal matters, 266 055 advice matters and 25 impact litigation matters.
• Court coverage in the District Courts was 86% against a target of ≥80% and in the Regional Courts was 94% against a target of ≥90%.

• 97.1% of Internal Legal Practitioners met the legal quality targets for both matter files and court appearances.

• Owing to prudent financial management, 98% (R2.01 billion) of the annual budget of R2.06 billion was spent.

• Sound financial management and good governance culminated in the nineteenth consecutive unqualified audit with no material findings.
• The staffing level was 91.9% (2 571 personnel) against a target of ≥95%; and the turnover rate was 5.8%, excluding Candidate Attorneys and temporary/contract staff.

48 79 • Human Resource practices benchmarked against Top Employer standards resulted in Top Employer accreditation for the eleventh consecutive year during 2019/20 and Industry Leader of the Public Sector category for fifth successive year.
• The Employment Value Proposition (EVP), relating to the Group Life Scheme, Learning and Development, and Performance Management, Reward and Recognition were improved within the available budget.

• eLAA, the newly developed electronic Legal Aid Administration System Legal went live in Quarter 3.

• Community outreach programmes surpassed the target.

This covered branding at Prison Cells, Police Cells and Court Precincts as well as community events at government key points.
A well-established social media presence has enhanced the Legal Aid SA brand.

10.12.2.

In the First Quarter 202/21, Legal Aid SA reports that: • It achieved 8 or 53% of 16 planned indicators.

Of the remaining indicators, 6 were partially achieved, 1 indicator was not achieved and 1 indicator was not scheduled.

• As a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, it assisted fewer clients in both criminal and civil matters.
However, all courts that were operational during the lockdown were covered by Legal Aid SA practitioners (General legal advice services were not available under Level 5 of the National Lockdown.

Under Levels 4 and 3, general advice was available through the Advice Line for matters permitted in terms of the Regulations and Court Directions.

General advice services at Local and Satellite Offices were restricted and only available by prior appointment.)

10.14.

Budget reductions 10.13.1.


The total projected baseline cut and shortfall over the MTEF period will be as follows: 49 80 • 2020 Adjusted Estimates of National Expenditure: The Compensation of Employee adjustment for Legal Aid SA is R104.2 million.

As communicated by National Treasury transfer payments to Legal Aid SA will be reduced with effect from January 2021.

• The 2020 MTEF Guidelines (2021/22 – 2023/24).


The 2020 MTEF Guideline stipulated baseline reductions of 5,7%, 8,5 % and 17,6 % for the upcoming three years: The total budget cut over the 2021 MTEF period is R695.1 million.

10.13.2.

Pending budget cuts will have a negative impact on the staffing levels and the number of matters undertaken by Legal Aid SA with the following cumulative effect: • Staff numbers will have to be reduced over the MTEF period.
The cost of retrenchment of staff will be calculated and funds for this will have to be identified.

• Coverage of courts will reduce over the MTEF period and this will affect all courts.

• The impact of the reduction in the staff numbers will also be reflected in the (reduced) number of legal matters undertaken over the MTEF period.

• There will also be a reduction in the number of advice matters undertaken.
• It is estimated that 1 079 staff members may be retrenched and court coverage will be reduced by more than 30% if the proposed budget cuts are effected.

11.

Special Investigating Unit (SIU) 11.1.

The legislative mandate of the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) is derived from the Special Investigating Unit and Special Tribunals Act 74 of 1996 (as amended).
The SIU’s principal function is to investigate serious malpractices, maladministration and corruption in connection with the administration of 50 81 state institutions, state assets and public money, as well as any conduct, which may seriously harm the interests of the public.

Matters are referred to the SIU through Presidential proclamations that set out the scope of the investigation.
The SIU also: • Institutes and conducts civil proceedings in any court of law or special tribunal, in its own name or on behalf of state institutions.

• Brings potential disciplinary matters to the attention of state institutions.

• Provides for the secondment of SIU officials to improve departmental systems.

11.2.
11.2.

Although the SIU does not have the power to arrest or prosecute offenders for criminal conduct, it reports matters to the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI/the Hawks), the South African Police Service (SAPS) and the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).

The SIU works closely with the Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU) in the NPA, where its powers are more appropriate or effective in recovering the proceeds of crime.
The MTSF also identifies the investigative reports of the Financial Intelligence Centre as key in the identification of high priority cases.

The SIU is part of the Anti- Corruption Task Team (ACTT), which was established to fast–track investigations and prosecutions of serious corruption cases.

11.3.

The SIU locates its role under the MTSF priorities: ‘Social Cohesion and Safe Communities’ and ‘A capable, ethical and developmental state’.
The MTSF envisages an improvement in corruption perception by the end of the five- year period.

The SIU is to contribute by reducing levels of fraud and corruption in the private and public sectors; freezing money and assets; establishing and strengthening the capacity of the Special Tribunal for civil recoveries; and increasing the use of Financial Intelligence Reports in identifying high priority cases.

11.4.
11.4.

The SIU has identified the following as key risks: 51 82 • Inability to financially sustain SIU operations in the short to medium term due to shortcomings in the funding model.

• Inability to timeously commence SIU investigations due to protracted approval process for proclamations.

• Failure by state institutions to implement the SIU’s legal recommendations.

• Inability to pro-actively assist public institutions to prevent corruption and maladministration practices.
• Insufficient preparedness to respond to physical threats to investigators and security breaches.

• • Inability to achieve forensic investigations legal outcomes.

Inability to conduct forensic investigations according to predetermined standards.

• Inability to attract an adequate and high performing workforce that is suitably skilled and properly managed.

• • Ineffective collaboration with external and internal stakeholders.
Failure to process and finalize civil matters enrolled in the Special Tribunal Court.

• Inability to provide appropriate ICT services across SIU business.

11.5.

Audit outcome.

The SIU maintained a clean audit outcome in 2019/20 (its fourth consecutive clean audit).

11.6.

Financial performance 11.6.1.

The SIU’s funding model provides for a baseline grant from National Treasury.

In addition, the SIU charges state institutions for its services, thus raising additional revenue.
The recovery of debts from state institutions for services has proven to be a challenge that requires legislative amendments (On average, the SIU has only been able to recover about 25% of the outstanding debt over the past seven years.

The value of outstanding debtors, however, has decreased since 2018/19 from R493 million to R420 million.)

52 83 11.6.2.
52 83 11.6.2.

The approved budget allocation in 2019/20 was R683 million, consisting of R363 million received from a government grant, R285 million in project funding and R37 million in other non-tax revenue.

11.6.3.

In 2020/21, the SIU’s projected total revenue is R820.4 million, compared with R683.3 million in 2019/20.

Additional funding in the amount of R225 million is made available to the SIU over the medium term (R70 million in 2020/21; R75 million in 2021/22; and R80 million in 2022/23).
The grant allocation is R452.9 million or 55.2% of the total projected revenue, while the SIU has projected that, in the 2020/21, it will receive R367.6 million in payments from state institutions for services rendered.

11.6.4.
11.6.4.

In 2019/20 and the First Quarter 2020/21, the SIU’s expenditure compared with the projected budget was as follows: Table 15: SIU – expenditure (R’000) 2019/20 2020/21 Quarter 1 Actual Final Variance % Q1 Q1 Variance Budget Actual Budget Income 696.4 685.0 11.4 2 151.4 205.1 53.7 /820.4 Expenses 502.9 685.2 182.1 27% 119.5 205.1 85.6 (42%) Surplus/ 193.5 - 193.5 - 0 32.1 - (Deficit) 11.6.5.
The explanation for the differences between the final budget and actual expenditure is as follows: • Income - 53 84 Ø CARA Funds: Cabinet approved the recommendations of the Criminal Asset Recovery Committee (CARC) to allocate R16 million to the SIU, to support corruption fighting and other forms of economic crimes as part of the Anti-Corruption Task Force (ACTT) and activities relating to the SIU Special Tribunal.
An amount of R 5.8 million had already been spent on these costs and was, therefore, recognised as income.

However, the amount was not budgeted for as it was only approved in December 2019.

Ø Interest Received: The positive balance was due to higher than expected average bank balances.

• Expenses - Ø Salaries: The SIU underwent an organisational review process to develop a new structure, which it intends to capacitate over the MTEF period.
The recruitment process was started in 2019/20 but could not be finalized.

Ø Travel and operational costs: The underspending related to the recruitment process, which is still ongoing.

Ø Administration Costs: The debt impairment projection is based on the evaluation of each state institution’s circumstances, including the historic payments, any application for exemptions made to National Treasury not to pay the SIU, payments received after 31 March 2020, and is consistent with previous financial years.
A major portion of the debts impaired during 2018/19 (R100 million) were recovered as a result of the SIU’s on-going efforts to recover debts.

11.6.6.

The Unit’s main cost driver is compensation of employees.

The Unit reported spending R478 million on its salaries budget for 2019/20.

(The SIU intends to increase its personnel from 516 in 2019/20 to 630 in 2020/21 and 722 in 2021/22 to enable it to conduct more investigations and to improve the turnaround times of investigations.)

54 85 11.7.
54 85 11.7.

Non-financial performance 11.7.1.

The SIU’s Strategic Plan 2020 – 2025 identifies certain high impact initiatives and interventions for the MTSF period: • Pursuing Priority High-Impact Targets to optimise the deployment of its resources.

• Rejuvenating the organisation by investing in critical parts of the business.

• Differentiating the SIU through its ‘unique offerings’.

• Enforcing consequence management measures through a monitoring and evaluation competency (with the Auditor General).
• Pursuing civil litigation.

• Applying cutting-edge data analytics and technology.

• Optimising the uniqueness of the Special Tribunal.

11.7.2.
The SIU has identified the following impact statement, organisational outcomes and five-year targets for 2020-2025: Table 16: SIU – Impact statement, outcomes and five-year targets 2020-2025 IMPACT STATEMENT: Ridding society of fraud and corruption in state institutions OUTCOME FIVE-YEAR TARGET A compliant, high performance SIU that is • Achieve and exceed all set well capacitated to rid society of corruption, performance targets maladministration and fraud in State • Maintain positive AG audit institutions outcomes State assets and cash resources are protected Estimated R10 billion from maladministration, fraud and corruption for the realisation of full value for money for state programmes 55 86 Confidence in the governance systems, An established index on confidence structures and policies of the State is restored in the state’s ability to effectively and maintained combat corruption and maladministration Corruption, maladministration and fraud A minimum 10% annual decrease deterred through proactive preventative (aligned to the MTSF Priority Five- mechanisms and effective enforcement of year target) consequence management measures 11.7.3.
The SIU has three programmes: Table 17: SIU – programmes PROGRAMME RESPONSIBILITY Administration Responsible for the provision of business oversight and enablement services to the core business units of the SIU.

Investigations and Responsible for ensuring the adequate execution of the Legal Counsel mandated service delivery of the SIU.
Market Data Responsible for the implementation of relevant and Analytics and proactive initiatives to prevent the reoccurrence of fraud Prevention and corruption cases as a result of systemic weaknesses in the public sector and to positively influence the behaviour of South African citizens 11.7.4.
At programme level, the SIU reports that, in 2019/20, it achieved 69% of its planned targets, while 20.7% of targets were not achieved and required an intervention and 10.3% were not achieved but significant work had been done.

11.7.5.

All targets that were not achieved related to the Administration programme.

11.7.6.

At the end of First Quarter 2020/21, the SIU reports that it achieved 25 % of targets; did not achieved 50% of targets (requiring an intervention) and partially achieved 17%.
Two targets did not form part of planned reporting 56 87 for the Quarter.

The lockdown as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic significantly affected performance as the SIU was not designated an essential service.
Table 18: SIU - Selected performance 2019/20 and Quarter 1 2020/21 Performance Indicators 2019/20 2020/21 Quarter 1 Target Actual Target 12% 23% 14% Actual 18.6% 75% 31% 80% Percentage vacancies of in funded posts Percentage implementation of an approved ICT Plan Rand value of R140 million R400 million R148 million R637,087.75 actual cash and/or assets to be recovered Q1: R37 million Rand value of R30 million R345.6 R60 million R1.4 million actual cash and/or assets recovered million Q1: R5 million Value of R800 million R4.3 billion R900 million R0 contract(s) and/or administrative decision(s)/action (s) set aside or deemed invalid Q1: R225 million Rand value of R30 million R4 billion R300 million R0 potential loss prevented Q1: R60 million 57 88 Performance Indicators 2019/20 2020/21 Quarter 1 Target Actual Target Actual Number of 100 638 referrals made for disciplinary action against official No.
of referrals 75 451 made to the relevant Prosecuting Authority 150 Q1: 38 200 Q1: 98 9 96 Value of matters in R1.5 billion R2.1 billion R1.6 billion R0 Q1: 400 million respect of which evidence was referred for the institution or defence/opposition of civil proceedings 11.8.

Linking financial and non-financial performance: • In 2019/20, the SIU achieved 69% of planned targets (all unachieved targets related to the Administration programme).
Under the Investigations and Legal Counsel programme, the SIU far exceeded its targets in many instances.

Although the SIU had a surplus of R193 million, R100 million was related to recovered monies in relation to project expenses incurred in 2018/19.

• Despite the challenges in achieving planned targets in the Administration programme, the SIU was able to maintain its clean audit opinion.

58 89 12.

South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) 12.1.
The SAHRC’s mandate is extremely broad, encompassing the promotion, protection and monitoring of human rights in South Africa.

The Commission derives its mandate from the Constitution and South African Human Rights Act, 2014.

The Commission also has specific obligations in terms of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, 2000, and Promotion of Access to Information Act, 2000.

12.2.
12.2.

In recognition of South Africa’s core challenges – high levels of poverty, inequality, unemployment and violence – all areas of the SAHRC’s work attempt to contribute to addressing each of these challenges.

The identified strategic focus for the period under review includes: children and migration; civil and political rights; disability and social security; education; equality and social cohesion; health care; land, environment and the right to food; and water, sanitation and housing.
Its interventions include complaints handling, strategic impact litigation, investigative hearings, public outreach, monitoring recommendations and research.

12.3.

Parliament ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) at the end of March 2019.

The OPCAT obliges State parties to establish national preventative mechanisms (NPM) to monitor places of prevention of liberty through regular visits.
The Commission is the co-ordinating body for the NPM in South Africa, in accordance with Article 17 of the OPCAT.

The Commission received R1.68 million in 2019/20 from the Justice Department for this work.

12.4.

The SAHRC has also been accredited as an Independent Monitoring Mechanism (IMM) under the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD).
This obligates the Commission to fully establish and 59 90 ensure the functionality of the IMM, monitor and report on compliance with the requirements of the CRPD to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

12.5.

The MTSF highlights the need for social cohesion and a key outcome under the priority ‘Social Cohesion and Safe Communities’ is the implementation of the National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance.
In addition, the MTSF identifies the Commission as contributing to: • The promotion of the Constitution and its values in schools, awareness campaigns, public engagements and dialogues.

• The development of a system to ensure consistent barrier free access for persons with disabilities to justice across the justice value chain.
• Strengthening and expanding protection measures for children and for adults with disabilities in institutionalised settings, such as special school boarding facilities, mental health care facilities and residential facilities.

12.6.
12.6.

The SAHRC’s Strategic Plan 2020-25 provides for mandate-linked strategies: • Promotion - Enhancing human rights advocacy, visibility and awareness programmes by conducting high impact engagements to influence policy, legislation and its application; establishing strategic partnerships for capacity and collaboration; empowering communities and the public to proactively engage with human rights issues; and utilising media platforms to raise awareness and increase visibility.
• Protection – Increasingly using redress mechanisms to minimise human rights violations by instituting strategic impact litigation and proactively conducting investigative inquiries and hearings.

• Monitoring – Comprehensive human rights monitoring and impact evaluation by strengthening and applying a comprehensive monitoring system to assess the state of human rights.

60 91 12.7.
60 91 12.7.

The Commission has four programmes: Administration; Promotion of human rights; Protection of human rights; and Monitoring observance of human rights.

12.8.

The Commission reports a current vacancy rate of 15% with 168 posts filled out of 198 approved posts.

12.9.

Audit outcome.

In 2019/20, the SAHRC received an unqualified audit opinion.
However, the Auditor General noted that while the quality of submitted financial statements has been maintained, the challenges within the supply chain management environment and performance information reporting remain.

The Auditor General urged the Commission complete investigations into instances of irregular expenditure with the necessary urgency so that corrective action can be implemented.

12.10.

Financial performance 12.10.1.


The Commission is allocated R213 million for 2020/21, increasing from R190.3 million in 2019/20.

This includes an approved National Treasury surplus rollover from 2019/20 of R9.1 million for special projects, which include: • Additional support for the OPCAT National Preventative Mechanism.

• A human rights monitoring system for the Commission.

• The 25th year Anniversary commemoration.

• PAIA mandated functions.

12.10.2.


Salaries dominate expenditure: In 2019/10, R125.8 million (or 70.2%) of expenditure was for this item.

Corporate Support costs amounted to R43.9 million (or 24.5%) of actual expenditure.

A similar breakdown applies to the Commission’s 2020/21 budget and expenditure patterns.

61 92 12.11.

Non-financial performance 12.11.1.


Overall, in 2019/20, the SAHRC achieved 36 or 88% of 41 targets, a significant improvement when compared to 2018/19 when it achieved 22 of 30 or 73% of planned targets.

Table 19: SAHRC – Performance 2019/20 Programme Administration Promotion Protection Monitoring Monitoring International Total Total Targets Actual Percentage achievement 15 10 4 7 5 41 11 9 4 7 5 36 73% 90% 100% 100% 100% 88% 12.11.2.
Key achievements for 2019/20 include: • Hosting the schools Moot Court Commission (in collaboration with the Departments of Justice and Basic Education.)

(Notably, the South African team went on to win an international moot court competition.)

• 224 public outreach engagements, reaching over 19 000 people.

• 700 strategic stakeholder engagements and collaborations, which reached in excess of 20 000 people.

• Finalising 8 891 (75%) of complaints/enquiries out of a total caseload of 11 803.
(Although the finalisation rate is lower than the 81% achievement in 2018/19, it was the highest number of cases finalised by the Commission since 2015/16 and the finalisation rate was significantly above the annual target for 2019/20 of 7000 cases finalised.)

12.11.3.

First Quarter 2020/21 performance: 62 93 • The Commission reports that it achieved 68% of its targets in the First Quarter 2020/21.
Much of the Commission’s focus was on human rights matters emanating from Covid-19 (particularly in respect of the issues of health, education, human settlements, water and sanitation) and the consequent lockdown.

The monitoring programme of the Commission was the most affected by the lockdown.

(Of a total number of 11 targets for this programme, the Commission achieved six (55%).)
• On 14 April 2020, the Commission established an advisory Committee to assist in monitoring the enforcement of the Covid-19 lockdown and its impact on human rights.

The Committee is chaired by Mr Chris Nissen and consists of a number of civil society organisations and individuals.

• The Commission also reports that: Ø It developed guidelines in response to the human rights implications arising from the Covid-19 situation.
In the process, the Commission engaged with the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs on the Regulations, resulting in an agreement to cooperate on issues of concern and ensure the protection and promotion of human rights.

Ø Through its NPM mandate, it has issued advisory recommendations to relevant state departments to strengthen the protection of children who are deprived of their liberty in the context of Covid-19.

12.12.

Budget reductions 12.12.1.


Although the Commission did not experience a budget cut in the Supplementary/Special Adjusted Budget in July 2020, the Commission has been advised of: • An “in-year” budget cut in the 2020/21 financial year of R8.4 million, to be funded from Compensation of Employees allocations.

(this will affect cost of living increases; notch increases and the performance bonuses budget).
63 94 • Proposed downward baseline adjustments in 2021/22 of R12.5 million in respect of compensation of employees and ‘hairline cuts’ of R11.5 million.

12.12.2.

The proposed cuts will have various consequences for operations, including: • Restricted delivery on the constitutional mandate, with adverse impact on the realisation of human rights.

The State of Disaster has increased human rights vulnerabilities and, therefore, there is higher demand for the Commission’s interventions and resources.
• The inability to address systemic human rights violations.

• Inadequate monitoring of the state of human rights in the country - Economic and social rights; Civil and Political Rights; Equality; International and regional human rights monitoring obligations.

• The inability to host the Schools Moot Court Competition.

• Minimal funding for the NPM.

• An inability to sustain the establishment of the CRPD and Child Rights Units, and restricted related monitoring activities.
• An inability to fulfil the requirement of the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPIA): Digitisation of operations and legal records.

• An inability to evaluate human rights interventions to ensure greater impact.

• Increasing costs of ensuring the safety of personnel.

• Risks international recognition as an A-status National Human Rights Institution.

12.12.3.
The Commission reports the following spending pressures and related forward funding needs: Table 20: Spending pressures and forward funding needs 2020 MTEF 64 95 Project 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 School Moot Court Competition 1.3 million R1.3 million R1.3 million OPCAT NPM (Ring-fence ends 21/22) CRPD unit set-up costs Child Rights Unit set-up costs - - - - R2.4 million 1.6 million 1.6 million - - Sub-Total R1.31 million R4.51 million R3.72 million Additional minimum capacity: R10.5 million R10.5 million R10.5 million 9 human rights officers and 9 legal officers.
Total R11.8 R15.1 R14.2 million million million 13.

Public Protector South Africa (PPSA) 13.1.

The Public Protector is an independent constitutional institution whose mandate, broadly, is to support and strengthen constitutional democracy by investigating maladministration or improper conduct in state affairs or the public administration in any sphere of government and to take appropriate remedial action.
The Constitution also states that the Public Protector must be accessible to all persons and communities.

13.2.

The PPSA’s Vision 2023 is underpinned by the following pillars: • • • • Enhancing access to (PPSA) services.

Engaging targeted communities in their mother tongue.

Expanding the (PPSA’s) footprint.

Leveraging stakeholder relations and formalising those relationships in Memoranda of Understanding.

65 96 • Projecting the image (of the PPSA) as being a safe haven for the downtrodden.
Empowering people to understand their rights.

Encouraging organs of state to establish effective internal complaints • • resolution units.

• Turning communities into their own liberators.

13.3.
13.3.

The PPSA has adopted a Strategic Plan 2020-2025 in terms of which it seeks to have the following impact: ‘Empower everyone at all levels of society to effectively engage organs of state about any injustice, service delivery failure or improper conduct and assist organs of state to establish and maintain efficient and effective governance and administration’.
Table 21: PPSA – Impact statement, outcomes, outcome indicators and five- year targets IMPACT STATEMENT: Empower everyone at all levels of society to effectively engage organs of state about any injustice, service delivery failure or improper conduct and assist organs of state to establish and maintain efficient and effective governance and administration OUTCOME INDICATOR FIVE-YEAR TARGET Accessible PPSA services Number of outreach 4 methods employed to (Clinics, Roadshows, reach people and Radio interviews and communities Mobile Referral Application) Number of new service 3 points established Investigations finalised Percentage of 80% within turnaround times investigations finalised 66 97 IMPACT STATEMENT: Empower everyone at all levels of society to effectively engage organs of state about any injustice, service delivery failure or improper conduct and assist organs of state to establish and maintain efficient and effective governance and administration OUTCOME INDICATOR FIVE-YEAR TARGET within approved turnaround times Number of systemic investigations finalised Clean audit achieved and Number of clean audit maintained outcomes over a 5 year period 6 5 Implementation of ICT Functional Mobile Implement a functional systems to optimally Referral Application Mobile Referral support business objectives Application Functional Case Implement a functional management Application Case Management Application Ongoing engagements Number of bodies being 6 (AOMA, and 4 with ombudsman and engaged on Ombudsman institutions to be organs of state related matters identified) 13.4.
Due to the Covid-19 pandemic and measures in place to deal with it, the PPSA had to adjust its targets, especially within the Stakeholder Management Programme.

A revised 2020/21 Annual Performance Plan was tabled in the National Assembly in August 2020.

13.5.

Audit outcome.

The PPSA achieved a clean audit opinion for the first time in 2019/20.

67 98 13.6.

Non-financial performance.

The PPSA reports that it achieved 79% of targets for 2019/20 and 70% of targets for the First Quarter 2020/21.

13.7.
13.7.

Financial performance 13.6.1.

In 2019/20, total revenue for the PPSA was R368 million.

Of this, R252.8 million went to Compensation of employees and R108.9 million to Goods and services.

13.6.2.

In 2020/21, the PPSA is allocated R341.8 million, compared to R322.6 million in 2019/20.

A total of 77.8% or R266 million is for compensation of employees, while the goods and services budget is R72.6 million or 21.2% of the overall budget.
Table 22: Public Protector SA Allocation 2020 MTEF PROGRAMME 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 (R’MILLION) Administration 170.1 135.2 142.6 148.8 (38%) Investigations (58%) Stakeholder engagement (4%) Total 183.0 13.9 192.4 14.3 203.5 14.5 213.8 13.0 368.0 341.8 360.6 377.9 13.6.3.

Notably, the PPSA’s budget was not affected by the Special Adjustment Budget which was required as part of the government’s economic response to the Covid-19 pandemic in July 2020.
However, the PPSA reports that it has cuts for 2020/21 of R16.1 million (as part of the AENE process); R72.7 million in 2021/22; R96.8 million in 2022/23; and R23.8 million in 2023/24.

13.6.4.
13.6.4.

For some years, the PPSA has indicated that it requires additional funding for the following priorities: 68 99 Table 23: Public Protector – additional funding needs Details 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 Reason (R’million) Critical positions 16.5 17.6 18.5 Unfilled vacancies (33) as a result of budget constraints Subject matters 10.0 10.5 15.5 Subject-matter experts needed experts for complex investigations requiring specialised skills.
Training 4.00 4.2 4.4 Cannot meet the 1% of the payroll budget as per the Skills Development Act.

E-library (Lexis 0.3 0.3 0.3 Access to tools of trade Nexis) required to ensure the quality and efficiency of investigations Electronic Case 15.0 1.0 1.0 Cases are monitored and Management system PPE Insurance for servers Security Capped leave managed manually.

0.9 0.1 6.1 1.3 0.9 0.1 6.4 1.6 - 0.2 Unable to replace uninsured servers if breakdown 9.5 2.0 No security at 17/18 offices.
No provision for this contingent liability relating to staff seconded form Justice Department Employee Health 0.3 0.3 0.4 - and Wellness Total 54.5 43.0 51.9 69 100 Part 4: Committee Observations 14.

Committee observations The Committee makes the following observations: 14.1.

Budget reductions 14.1.1.

The Committee is acutely aware of the extremely constrained fiscal environment.
(Notably, when meeting with the Department and each entity and institution, the Committee asked what plans they had to mitigate the impact of the proposed budget reductions.

It was concerning that very few appeared to be prepared in this respect.)

As the Committee has said many times, the delivery of justice services is labour intensive.

Of course, there is scope for improved use of resources.
Nonetheless, in carrying out the proposed budget reductions, there should be careful consideration of how, in particular, the reduced salaries’ budget, implying a further reduction of capacity, will affect the overall effectiveness of the judicial system.

14.1.2.

At the NPA, the Committee notes that a committed leadership and the allocation of more resources for additional prosecutorial capacity has begun to make a difference.
The NPA’s presentation of its performance, its frank engagement with the Committee on the challenges it has and the measures it has already, or plans to, put in place reflects well on the institution and were refreshing.

For far too long, insufficient weight has being given to the essential nature of prosecutorial services.

The NPA has been crippled by the loss of managers, prosecutors and legal administrative and investigative staff who have left the organisation in droves.
This has increased the workload on the remaining officials intolerably.

There are high expectations of the NPA to deliver but without the resources to address obstacles, such as the high 70 101 vacancy rate (particularly in the AFU and SCCU, as well as the SOCA Unit), these expectations are and will remain unreasonable.
The Committee, therefore, repeats its opposition to any attempt to cut the NPA’s budget as a reduction will reverse the gains that the recent additional allocation of R1.2 billion for the MTEF has made possible.

14.1.3.

Legal Aid SA, which is managed with distinction on a relatively modest budget to achieve impressive results year-after-year, can no longer absorb the budget shortfall/cuts through further efficiencies and cost containment measures.
The only recourse going forward is to reduce the staff establishment and it is preparing for the possibility of retrenchments.

The projected reduction in the number of its legal practitioners is substantial and will significantly impact on service delivery, resulting in an increase in pending matters and case backlogs in criminal courts, a reduction in the number of clients assisted in civil matters and advice matters and the further effect of compromising the quality of legal services.
All of this compromises the constitutional obligations to make State-funded legal services available if substantial injustice would otherwise result.
The Committee does not believe that it is an efficient or effective use of resources within the criminal justice system to reduce the number of legal aid practitioners, as it is likely to lead to more postponed criminal matters due to the unavailability of legal representation, in so doing increasing the number of awaiting trial detainees in our correctional centres and the length of their stay (for all of which the State pays).
The reductions will also affect Legal Aid SA’s ability to render services to the most vulnerable in our society through it civil work programme.

The Committee, therefore, does not support the implementation of planned budget reductions in the case of Legal Aid SA.

14.1.4.

The Committee also does not support the proposed reductions in the case of the SIU, whose performance trajectory is most pleasing.
As part of the ACTT 71 102 and also of the Fusion Centre set up to deal with cases of Covid-19 corruption, the SIU does not work in isolation.

The budget reductions will, therefore, not only adversely affect its operations but the impact will be felt by all the related law enforcement agencies engaged with the task of combatting corruption.

The SIU is also instrumental to the present efforts to swiftly recover monies lost to the State through the Special Tribunal.
These efforts have so far proven to be successful and any budget reductions may, in addition, undermine the SIU’s capability in this regard.

14.1.5.

The Committee has noted previously that the Chapter 9 institutions are historically underfunded.

In some instances, their constitutional and/or statutory mandates are for all intents and purposes unfunded.

(The SAHRC, for example, has an unfunded mandate for its responsibilities with regard to the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), 2000).
This has had adverse consequences for their structure and operations and, arguably, restricted their impact.

These institutions have relatively modest budgets and, therefore, feel budget cuts/reductions especially severely.
In the case of the SAHRC, it already has budget shortfalls and the proposed budget reductions threaten, for example, the Moot Court competition, which is an initiative to raise awareness of human rights aimed at Grade 10 and 11 students at all public schools in the country and has considerable impact.

The money required to run the competition is a relatively small amount, yet the SAHRC reports that it will not be able to afford to do so going forward.
The Committee notes as well that the PPSA has asked for increased funding for critical posts, professional fees for subject matter specialists and security.

This is not the first time the PPSA has asked for funding for these purposes.
The Committee repeats its view that the decision to apply the budget cuts to the baseline allocation of a Chapter 9 institutions should carefully consider 72 103 their unique contribution towards strengthening our constitutional democracy, as well as the duty placed on other state institutions to assist these institutions.

The Committee, therefore, does not support the application of baseline reductions in the case of the SAHRC and PPSA.
The Committee observes once more that the matter of an appropriate funding model for the Chapter 9 institutions needs to be addressed.

14.2.

Department of Justice and Consitutional Development 14.2.1.

The Committee is gravely concerned about the Department’s negative audit outcome and dismal performance - both financial and non-financial - in the period under review.
The Department received a qualified audit opinion and achieved less than 50% of its planned indicators, while considerably underspending in 2019/20.

Despite the commitment during last year’s BRRR hearings to address the Department’s poor performance and audit outcome, it appears that matters have further deteriorated.

In this regard, the Committee notes that leadership instability and high vacancy rates are identified as among the root causes of the challenges that the Department faces presently.
The Committee appreciates the Minister’s forthrightness about the state of affairs within the Department and notes the plans that are being put in place to address the situation.

The Committee intends to continue to monitor progress very closely.

Concerning the audit action plan, the Committee requests that it be briefed on progress as part of the quarterly meetings between it and the Department.
The Committee welcomes the Minister’s assurance that rebuilding the administration is part of the Department’s renewal plans.

The Committee has long expressed the view that the high vacancy rate in the Department’s senior management – now at 23.4% - is at the heart of the Department’s present troubles and must be addressed as a matter of priority.

Furthermore, the 73 104 Department is without a Director-General and has been so for more than a year.
It is evident that, from an administrative perspective, the Department is rudderless.

There have been some positive developments.

A recommendation has been made for the appointment of a Director-General and the matter is now with the Department of Public Service and Administration before going to Cabinet.

In addition, the positions of the Chief Master and the Deputy Director-General: Corporate Services now been filled.

14.2.2.

Investigation of Department’s non-performance.


In addition, the Committee intends to request assistance from the Public Service Commission (PSC) to identify the Department’s non-performance and systemic challenges and to report to Parliament on its findings in this regard.

The Public Service Commission derives its mandate from sections 195 and 196 of the Constitution, as well as the Public Service Commission Act, 1997.
Broadly, the PSC is charged with safeguarding the public interest through the effective monitoring and evaluation of government practices.

More specifically, the Public Service Commission is vested with oversight responsibilities for the public service, and monitors, evaluates and investigates public administration practices.

It is also charged with promoting the values and principles governing public administration contained in section 195 of the Constitution.
As such, the Committee believes that the PSC is the appropriate body to conduct such an investigation.

14.3.

Irregular expenditure expenditure.

The Committee is interested in the underlying causes of the irregular expenditure; the steps that the Department plans to take to prevent re-occurrences; the status of investigations into unconfirmed amounts; and the status of disciplinary action taken against the officials responsible, including efforts to reclaim these amounts.
As such, the Committee requests that the Department include a report on this item as part of the Committee’s meetings with the Department on quarterly performance.

74 105 14.4.

Accountability.

The Committee notes the Minister’s concern about the lack of accountability within the Department.
The Committee has time after time highlighted the importance of consequence management and therefore, asks that it be given a consolidated report of all outstanding disciplinary matters in order that it may track progress going forward.

14.5.

Expanded court infrastructure for improved access to justice.

The building of new courts remains a core element of the Department’s efforts to improve access to justice.

Each year, the Department is allocated a substantial budget for this purpose.
Typically, around this time, the Department announces ‘savings’ as a result of the Department of Public Works’s inability to deliver and informs the Committee that it intends to request Treasury’s permission to reprioritise the funds elsewhere to meet other (more pressing) priorities.

(As these funds are ringfenced they cannot be shifted to the salaries budget for more capacity.)
A review of committee reports over the past decade or more, reveals continued frustration about the tardy delivery of the infrastructure programme and the waste that inevitably accompanies this.

The Committee understands that, for now, the Department must rely on the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure to deliver its building programme but is extremely unhappy at the lack and/or quality of the results.
As a first step, the Committee intends to arrange a dedicated briefing on (i) the scope of Department’s infrastructure programme; (ii) the allocation of resources (past and present; (iii) the nature of the relationship with the Department of Public Works and related responsibilities; and (iii) the extent of the Department’s in- house capacity.

14.6.

Transformation of State Legal Services.


The Committee has previously noted the appointment of the Acting Solicitor-General and appreciates his input during the briefings on initiatives to transform State Legal Services.

The Committee notes that many of the State Attorney’s Offices do not have a Head and agrees that filling these vacancies is critical.

The Committee notes the sharp increase in the amounts owed by client departments for legal fees.
75 106 The Committee will arrange a dedicated meeting in order to deepen its understanding of the operations of this Office countrywide and the challenges it faces, as well as the plans to transform State Legal Services as a whole, as soon as the programme permits.

The Committee has been briefed previously on the progress of the SIU investigation of the Office of the State Attorney and will continue to regularly monitor the progress of the investigation.

14.7.
14.7.

A transformed legal profession and briefing patterns.

The Committee believes that a great deal more needs to be done to support black legal practitioners, especially black women, wishing to make law their career.

The Committee notes the Department’s initiatives to ensure that briefing patterns support previously disadvantaged individuals.

Nevertheless, the impact of this does not seem to be felt by practitioners who complain that they lack work to sustain viable practices.
The Committee is of a view that there is a need to ask why this is so and looks forward to engaging with the Acting Solicitor General on this topic.

14.8.

Court-annexed mediation.

The Committee notes the failure to meet the targets related to the court-annexed mediation project for 2019/20.

14.9.

Sexual offences matters.


In the period under review, President Ramaphosa announced the introduction of the Gender-based Violence and Femicide (GBVF) Emergency Response Action Plan (ERAP), which was to be funded by a reprioritised budget of R1.6 billion.

The Committee notes that the Department reports that it has actively participated in the GBVF Intersectoral Steering Committee, which was tasked to monitor the multisectoral implementation of the GBVF.
The Department reports also that, in 2019/20, it installed dual-view CCTV systems in 26 Regional Courts (a lack of budget prevented the Department from meeting this target in 2018/19).

In addition, 13 more sexual offences courts were established.

Furthermore, now that section 55A of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) 76 107 Amendment Act, 2007 was signed into operation, for the first time Sexual Offences Courts will be established in accordance with statute.
During the same month of February 2020, the Minister gazetted the Regulations relating to sexual offences courts.

The intention is to designate all 102 sexual offences courts established since 2013.
The Committee notes that the Department has vetted 12 758 of its officials against the National Register for Sex Offenders to ensure that no registered sex offenders work as officials at service points that have direct access to children and persons with mental disabilities and has also drafted and tabled legislation to tighten the laws relating to GBVF.
The Committee notes further that the Department has tabled its 2019/20 Report on the Implementation on the Criminal Law Sexual Offences and Related Matters Act and believes that consideration of its contents will provide an opportunity for focused engagement on this issue.

The Committee will arrange a briefing on the Report as soon as its programme permits.

14.10.

Master’s Office.

The Committee is increasingly concerned by reports of the chaos that exists at the Master’s Office.
While the appointment of the Chief Master is a step in the right direction, the Committee is of the view that much more will need to be done to address the problems and at the soonest possible opportunity will engage with the Master’s Office on improvements to rectify the challenges that are being experienced.

The Committee has been briefed previously on the progress of the SIU’s investigations of the Master’s Office but will continue to regularly monitor the progress of the investigation.
The Committee also notes the recent cyber-security breach at the Master’s office in Pietermaritzburg, which is now the subject of a criminal investigation.

As a result of the breach, the Department had to shut down the 77 108 system and payments from the Guardian’s Fund were affected at that Office.

The Department reported that alternative arrangements were made to ensure that funds are disbursed but the Committee requests the full report on the incident.

14.11.
14.11.

National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance (NAP).

The MTSF continues to prioritise social cohesion.

The Committee has previously noted the Department’s plan to contribute to building a human rights culture and to giving effect to constitutional values by driving campaigns to increase constitutional awareness and change societal attitudes in the areas of racism, xenophobia and related intolerances.
The Committee notes the limited progress surrounding the implementation of the NAP and repeats its intention to engage with the Department on this item.

14.12.

Integrated Criminal Justice Strategy/Integrated Justice System (IJS).

This year has highlighted the need for systems in place that will allow for the sharing of information between departments and entities within the JCPS Cluster.
The strategy is to incorporate the modernisation of the criminal justice system and will address concerns raised at community level that include the implementation of the bail system and the lack of support for victims of crime..

The ultimate goal of the IJS is to ensure the seamless integration and consolidation of critical information between the entities that form part of the JCPS Cluster.
The Committee requests that it be provided with a detailed progress report with timeframes on the Integrated Justice System (IJS) programme.

The Committee will also arrange a dedicated briefing on this item as soon as its programme permits.

14.13.

Justice College.

The Committee welcomes the plans to rebuild Justice College as part of measures to improve the quality of the services offered to the public by justice officials.

78 109 15.

National Prosecuting Authority 15.1.

Budget reductions.
Budget reductions.

The Committee opposes any reduction of the NPA’s budget and discusses this in parapgraph 14.1 above.

Furthermore, the Committee also wishes to highlight that the NPA plays a role in recovering money for the State, as part of efforts to rebuild our economy and society.

15.2.

The NDPP told the Committee that she had found the NPA under-resourced in terms of skills, capacity and funding.

This has affected the NPA’s credibility and staff morale was low.
The Committee notes that the initiatives reportedly underway to address these challenges extend far beyond the filling vacancies, including ways to promote sound workplace relations.

The first step undertaken in turning the NPA around has been to address the challenges at top management and to appoint individuals who are committed and are of the utmost integrity.

The next step has been to vist all divisions and cluster so that officals could raise their concerns.
An action plan has been developed and progress reports are regularly communicated to staff.

15.3.

Innovation and Policy Support Office.

The Committee notes that the NPA reports that it has established an Innovation and Policy Support Office, which is meant to be a space where innovative ideas are developed to allow the NPA to rebuild its structures and reputation.

15.4.

NPA’s performance.

The Committee welcomes the NDPP’s honesty about the NPA’s performance not being at the level it should be.
Although the Committee would have liked to have been presented with a better performance report, it accepts that it will need to be patient so that the many interventions that have been put in place in the past year or so can bear fruit.

The Committee agrees that the NDPP’s assessment of the AFU’s performance as dismal.
The Committee understands that, as many of the AFU’s prosecutors and investigators were moved to the Independent 79 110 Directorate, the AFU has a high vacancy rate among its prosecutors and even higher vacancies among investigators.

The appointment of Adv.

Rabaji Rasethaba to head the AFU is the first step in addressing the situation and there is a process underway to develop a turnaround strategy.
The Committee notes too that the NPS’ performance, which was on an upward trajectory under the leadership of Adv.

de Kock, has been affected by the pandemic.

15.5.

Strengthening the independence of the NPA.

At the beginning of the 6th Parliament, the NDPP indicated that it is not satisfactory for the NPA to have the Director-General: Justice and Constitutional Development as its accounting officer.
The NDPP updated the Committee of the progress that has been made, informing the Committee that a comprehensive report has been compiled and the next step is to draft a memorandum for the Minister’s attention.

The Committee welcomes the NDPP’s undertaking to share the relevant documents once the discussion with the Minister has taken place.

15.6.

Backlogs.

The Committee notes the view that case backlogs are a measure of how well or badly the justice system in its entirety is working.
There are a number of actors that interact with the system and at the very heart is the Judiciary.

It is for this reason, that the Judiciary is responsible for case management as it is the Judiciary that leads court discipline.

The NPA reports that it participates fully in the relevant judiciary-led national and provincial co-ordinating structures.

However, the absence of a well-functioning electronic case management system is highly problematic.
Furthermore, the onset of Covid-19 has seriously disrupted the functioning of our courts, particularly as officials have become sick or are sick and some have even passed away.

The Committee notes too the warning that, for some time to come, it is to be expected that there will be red flags concerning the NPS’ perfromance.

15.7.

Gender-based Violence.


The Committee agrees with the NPA’s reflection that the improved conviction rate for sexual offences – although welcome –is 80 111 considerably less impressive when measured against the number of reported sexual offences.The Committee believes that a great deal more attention and resources need to be directed towards supporting survivors in taking their cases forward.

The Committee welcomes that further Thuthuzela Care Centres (TCCs) are to be established.
The Committee is also pleased to hear that NDPP has asked that the findings and recommendations of previous evaluative reports on the functioning of the TCCs be collated for action.

The Committee notes too that the TCCs remain largely funded through donor funding as the funding model has not yet been resolved.
The Committee is pleased to learn that the NPA has engaged with SAPS, with the assistance of the respective Ministries, to address the backlogs at the forensic laboratories, particularly in respect of sexual offences cases.

The NPA has been given a commitment from SAPS that it will prioritise the processing of these cases.

The Committee asks that the NPA keep it informed of progress in this regard.
Furthermore, the Committee notes that NPA has contributed to 2019/20 Report on the Implementation on the Criminal Law Sexual Offences and Related Matters Act and will arrange a dedicated briefing on the Report as soon as its programme permits.

15.8.

Corruption-related cases.

The Committee welcomes the strong focus on the identification of 81 priority corruption cases for swift finalisation and the reorganisation of resources to that end.
The Committee agrees that recent arrests suggest that the NPA is on the right trajectory.

15.9.

Covid-19 corruption.

Regarding the Covid-19 investigations into fraud, corruption and non-compliance with the PFMA, the Committee is impressed by the results so far and believes that this shows what can be achieved when law enforcement agencies work together.

81 112 15.10.

Asset Forfeiture Unit.

The Committee is extremely concerned by the AFU’s performance.
In this regard, the Committee notes the explanation that was put forward.

The Committee supports the steps that are being taken to address these capacity challenges.

The Committee notes also the AFU’s concern that the empowering legislation is lagging behind and requires legislative attention.

15.11.

Independent Directorate.

The Committee is pleased that the recent amendment of the Regulations for Commission of Inquiry into State Capture has greatly assisted the Independent Directorate.
The Committee notes too that the Commission has a state of the art digital forensic capability that is now available to the Independent Directorate.

16.

Information Regulator 16.1.

The Committee welcomes the commencement of certain sections of POPIA with effect from 1 July 2020, while noting that the remaining provisions will become operational on 1 July 2021.

The Information Regulator reported previously that it would be ready for the full operationalisation of the Act as from 1 July 2021.
However, the Committee fears that the current budget constraints, combined with rising incidents of reported data breaches, risk the success of the plans, as the Regulator may not have the requisite capacity to play the role that is envisaged.

16.2.

It should not be forgotten that the Regulator is a relatively new organisation and, as such, is still busy setting itself.
With the full operationalisation of the Act, the demand for its services/guidance has the potential to outstrip what can reasonably be expected of the Regulator to deliver without a considerable injection of resources.

This mismatch may well undermine the Regulator’s authority/legitimacy going forward.

In terms of recruitment, the Regulator has identified a phased-approach to recruitment..
The Committee notes, 82 113 however, that there is a substantial shortfall in the budget to fund the expansion that is envisaged and this will adversely affect the Regulator’s capability going forward.

The Committee, therefore, repeats its view, that it is vital for the Information Regulator to be provided with adeqaute funding so that it is able to provide guidance as South Africa goes about setting up its data protection regime.
Furthermore, the Committee believes that a well functioning data protection regime is vital to international trade and, therefore, will contribute to South Africa’s access to economic opportunities and growth.

16.3.
16.3.

The risks of not having an adequate data protection regime were sharply highlighted with the Experion data breach that resulted in the personal details, including identity numbers and bank details, of millions of South Africans and thousands of South African businesses being ‘dumped’ on the dark web.
Cyber-attacks are reportedly on the increase (and even more so since the COVID-19 pandemic as we adapt to living increasingly online), targetting South African individuals and public and private sector organisations in orchestrated attacks that could have devastating consequences, not to mention financial losses.
The risks are serious and, consequently, the Committee emphasises its belief that the necessary resources must be allocated to prevent South Africa from becoming a haven for cybercriminals, in particular.

16.4.

The Committee notes that the Information Regulator submitted a report to Parliament that focuses on the protection of personal information of a data subject processed during the management of the Covid-19 pandemic.
The Committee welcomes the report and will engage with the contents as soon as its programme permits.

17.

Legal Aid South Africa 17.1.

Budget reductions.

The Committee does not support budget reductions to Legal Aid SA’s budget, and discusses its reasons for this in paragraph 14.1.

83 114 Briefly, Legal Aid SA is an exemplary organisation that performs extremely well.
(In this regard, the Committee wishes to highlight the positive relationship between the excellance of its governance and Legal Aid SA’s ability to perform its mandate with distinction).

A reduction in its budget will affect not only its capability to deliver on its constitutional mandate but will negatively affect the entire criminal justice system, most obviously contributing to further backlogs.
The reduction of its capacity to perform civil work (already limited by the lack of resources to only 13% of its caseload) will mean that the most vulnerable in our society will largely be unable to access the legal services and assistance they require.

17.2.

Audit outcome.

The Committee congratulates Legal Aid SA on its achievement in maintaining a clean audit opinion.

17.3.

Awards.

In addition, Legal Aid SA was once more awarded Top Employer accreditation.
Without fail, Legal Aid SA impresses with its clear strategic vision and planning, management of resources and considerable achievements.

17.4.

Budget.

So far, Legal Aid SA has been able to manage the budget shortfall and baseline reductions (with some help from the Department) through reduced court coverage and a lower recruitment rate.
However, if it must implement the proposed budget reductions over the medium term, it will need to retrench satff and this will have a significant impact on the availability of legal aid services in all courts.

As it is, the Committee is aware that the high demand for legal aid services poses an enormous challenge to Legal Aid SA’s practitioners, especially as practitioner coverage at many courts is insufficient and there is no longer a relief capacity.
The Committee has asked before at what stage the lack of funds for legal representation becomes a constitutional matter.

Legal Aid SA’s funding needs are set out elsewhere in this report.

84 115 17.5.

Civil work.

Legal Aid SA’s budget goes largely towards funding legal representation of accused in criminal matters, as there is a constitutional obligation on the State to assist accused persons without legal representation.
The Committee remains concerned at the extent to which criminal matters are prioritised over civil matters.

The Committee appreciates the many efforts that Legal Aid SA has taken to stretch its capacity to undertake civil work to the very limits – now at about 13% of its caseload consists of civil matters.

The Committee notes that there is now the risk that Legal Aid SA will no longer be able to maintain its current caseload in respect of civil matters, let alone significantly expand its civil work.
The Committee, however, feels very strongly that funding should at least maintain the current level of legal assistance provided in civil matters.

17.6.

Land justice.

The Committee welcomes the update from Legal Aid SA on the progress of the negotiations to transfer the legal representation function and, importantly, the related budget currently undertaken by the Land Rights Management Facility in the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development to it.

17.7.

Employment equity targets.


The Committee notes that Legal Aid SA conducted an employment equity audit in 2019 identifying the most prominent areas of under-representation that require attention are that of African females at Top and Senior Management levels.

Employees with disabilities are also under-represented at 1.75% of the total workforce.

The Committee appreciates Legal Aid SA’s efforts to address the under- representation going forward and will monitor progress.

18.
18.

Special Investigating Unit 18.1.

Budget reductions.

As discussed under paragraph 14.1, the Committee is opposed to budget reductions in the case of the SIU.

The SIU is a key roleplayer in efforts to (i) bring those responsible for fraud, corruption and 85 116 non-compliance to book, (ii) recover monies on behalf of the State; and (iii) prevent wrongdoing by instilling a culture of compliance within our society.

The SIU also brings money back to the State.


Budget reductions will affect its capacity and undermine the State’s anti-corruption agenda.

18.2.

Audit outcome.

The Committee noted the positive relationship between good governance within an institution and its impact.

In this regard, it congratulates the SIU for its excellent audit results.

The Committee is also pleased that the Audit Committee was able to provide the assurance that, from its perspective, there are no concerns.

18.3.

Personnel.
18.3.

Personnel.

The Committee notes the SIU’s commitment to address its human resources-related challenges.

The Committee has expressed itself previously on the need for the SIU to meet employment equity targets, in particular, regarding the employment of women in the professional qualified category and persons with disabilities.

The SIU has also acknowledged that its working environment does not adequately support persons with disabilities.
The Committee appreciates the SIU’s commitment to address its challenges in this regard, as reflected in its plans, and will monitor progress closely.

18.4.

Funding model.

The Committee understands that legislative amendments to, among others, address the challenges concerning the SIU’s present funding model are at advanced stage.
The Committee is aware that, for several years, there have been proposals to amend the SIU’s enabling legislation and, therefore, urges the SIU prioritise finalisation of these amendments.

18.5.

Debt recovery.

The Committee notes the ongoing difficulties that the SIU has recovering monies owed to it by state institutions for its services and that this poses a significant risk going forward.
This is especially concerning given the the possibility that the SIU, like all organs of State, may have budget reductions in future.

The Committee appreciates the SIU’s efforts to address some of the reasons it has identified as contributing to non-payment, which 86 117 have had some effect.

The Committee is also told that National Treasury will send letters to the entities that owe the SIU money.
A further proposal is that, where applicable, the Audititor-General record the SIU as a creditor when it audits state institutions.

However, as mentioned in the previous paragraph, the need for legislative amendments to address the problem is key.

18.6.

Collaboration and co-operation concerning investigations.
The Committee is pleased about how effective the co-operation and collaboration between law enforement agencies particpating in the Fusion Centre has been and that it is clear that already there have been significant benefits.

The Committee notes, as well, the SIU’s assurance that the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between it and the NPA is showing results.
In this regard, the Committee welcomes the suggestion that the MOU also include the HAWKS so that when the SIU begins an investigation, the HAWKS can be brought in at that early stage.

This should expedite the prosecution of cases.

18.7.

Special Tribunal.

The Committee notes that the value of matters enrolled at the Special Tribunal is presently around R5 billion.

19.

South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) 19.1.

Audit outcome.
Audit outcome.

The Committee welcomes the SAHRC’s achievement in receiving an unqualified audit outcome but urges the Commission to address the Auditor General’s recommendation that it finalise investigations of instances of irregular expenditure with the necessary urgency.

19.2.

Budget reductions.

The Committee does not support the proposed budget reductions in the case of the SAHRC or the PPSA and discusses its reasons in paragraph 14.1.
In the case of the SAHRC, a cut next year will reduce the baseline by R10 million, which the Commission will have difficulty absorbing.

The Covid-19 pandemic has laid bare the extreme inquality that characterises our society.

The need for the Commission’s intervening 87 118 presence, given the degree of social conflict that is evident within our society, is more important than ever before.
The Committee notes too the Commission’s investigations and hearings have resulted in a deep understanding of the challenges that our society faces, which has the potential for many positive interventions towards upholding human rights.

An example, has been in the area of water and sanitation, which is a complex issue that affects municipalities countrywide.

The Committee believes more should be done to ensure that the Commission’s reports are taken up and acted upon.

19.3.

Budget shortfall.


The Committee notes the Commission’s presentation of its forward funding needs, the details of which are captured elsewhere in this report.

19.4.

Non-responsiveness of state institutions.

The Committee notes the SAHRC difficulties in obtaining responses from departments and other state institutions.

The Committee is also dismayed that many of the issues raised at the Commission’s public hearings are not new and were addressed in previous reports.
However, these recommendations were never implemented.

The Committee, therefore, welcomes the Commission’s commitment to monitor and ensure implementation of its recommendations going forward.

The Committee will raise the need to develop a mechanism to assist the SAHRC and other Chapter 9 institutions in the event that government agencies are unresponsive to their requests with the Speaker.

19.5.

Moot Court Competition.


The Committee supports the SAHRC initiative concerning the schools’ Moot Court Competition as a flagship intervention in its efforts to promote public awareness of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The Committee congratulates the scholars who represented South Africa internationally, doing so well in winning the competition.

The Committee is gravely concerned that the competition is now at risk as a result of the proposed budget reductions.

88 119 20.
88 119 20.

Public Protector South Africa 20.1.

Audit Outcome.

The Committee commends the PPSA from achieving a clean audit opinion for the first time ever.

20.2.

Budget reductions.

The Committee does not support budget reductions in the case of the SAHRC and PPSA and discusses it reasons in paragraph 14.1.

20.3.

Budget shortfall.

The Committee notes that the PPSA continues to maintain that the current budget is inadequate.

The PPSA’s funding needs are recorded elsewhere in this report.
In this regard, the Committee has previously supported increased funding for the PPSA.

20.4.

The Committee notes the PPSA’s intention to encourage state organisations to establish in-house complaints units.

The reduction of the number of complaints that the PPSA has to deal with will allow it’s investigators to focus on more complex matters.

This should also assist to reduce the number of service delivery protests.

20.5.

Performance.
20.5.

Performance.

The Committee notes the PPSA’s report that it has improved its performance in 2019/20 to achieve 79% of its targets.

This is an improvement on the previous year when 72% of performance targets were achieved.

20.6.

Litigation.

The Committee once more requests that the PPSA keep it informed of the number and progress of review applications and the associated litigation costs.

21.

Recommendations 21.1.

The Committee makes the following recommendations – 89 120 23.1.1.
The Committee does not support budget reductions in the case of the NPA, Legal Aid South Africa, and the SIU.

The Committee is gravely concerned at the potential of the reductions to undermine the contributions of each of these organisations to the maintenance of the rule of law.

The Committee gives detailed reasons to support its recommendations in each instance previously in the report.

23.1.2.
23.1.2.

The Committee supports the additional forward funding needs presented to it by the Information Regulator to allow it to recruit staff as planned.

23.1.3.

Likewise, the Committee does not support the proposed application of budget reductions in the case of the case of the SAHRC to prevent any further loss of human resource capacity and to enable it to maintain its existing activities.

The Committee gives detailed reasons to support its recommendation elsewhere in the report.

23.1.4.
23.1.4.

The Committee supports the additional forward funding needs presented to it by the SAHRC.

23.1.5.

The Committee does not support the application of budget reductions at the PPSA and provides reasons for this elsewhere in the report.

23.1.6.

The Committee also recommends that special consideration be given to allocating additonal funds to allow the PPSA to address the absence of security at its offices.

23.1.7.
23.1.7.

The Committee recommends that the Public Service Commission be approached with the request that it evaluate the Department with a view to identifying the reasons for the Department’s non-performance and any systemic challenges, and report to the House on its findings and recommendations before the annual budgetary review and recommendation report processes take place in October 2021.

90 121 22.

Appreciation 22.1.


The Committee thanks the Minister and Deputy Minister, the Director General and all officials who appeared before the Committee for their co- operation.

22.2.

The Committee thanks the National Director of Public Prosecutions and all officials who appeared before the Committee for their co-operation in this process.

22.3.
22.3.

The Committee also wishes to thank the Public Protector and Deputy Public Protector; the Chairperson and Commissioners of the South African Human Rights Commission; the Board Members of Legal Aid South Africa; the Head of the Special Investigating Unit; and the Chairperson and Members of the Information Regulator, as well as all respective officials that appeared before the Committee for their co-operation.

22.4.
22.4.

The Committee thanks the representatives of the various audit committees that appeared before the Committee.

22.5.

The Committee wishes to thank the Auditor General South Africa for the support it provided to the Committee.

Report to be considered 91 122 3.


The Budgetary Review and Recommendation Report of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, dated 19 February 2020 The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services, having considered the financial and non-financial performance information of the Office of the Chief Justice and Judicial Administration for the financial year ending 31 March 2020 and First Quarter of 2020/21, reports as follows: 1.

Introduction 1.1.
Introduction 1.1.

The Money Bills Procedure Amendment and Related Matters Act 9 of 2009 sets out the process that allows Parliament to make recommendations to the Minister of Finance to amend the budget of a national department.

1.2.
1.2.

In October of each year, portfolio committees must compile Budgetary Review and Recommendation Reports (BRRR) that assess service delivery performance of departments, entities and institutions given their respective available resources; evaluate the effective and efficient use and forward allocation of resources; and may make recommendations on the future allocation of resources.
The annual review of expenditure and performance for the previous financial year (2019/2020) also forms part of this process.
1.1 In particular, section 5(1) of the Money Bills Act provides that committees must make their assessment of the performance of national departments and institutions, with reference to the following: • The medium term estimates of expenditure of each national department, its strategic goals and measurable objectives, as tabled in the National Assembly with the national budget; • Prevailing strategic plans; • The expenditure reports or statements relating to a vote appropriating funds for such department published by the National Treasury in terms of section 32 of the Public Finance Management Act; • The financial statements and annual report of such department; • The reports of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts relating to a department; and • Any other information requested by or presented to a House or Parliament.
1 123 1.2 Committees may make recommendations on the future allocation of resources, having assessed service delivery performance to date; evaluated the effective and efficient use of the resources already allocated; and considered the planned forward allocation of resources.

1.3 Committees ordinarily schedule meetings to prepare for the BRRR in the first two weeks of October each year, right after the annual reports are tabled at the end of September.
1.4 This year, the Minister of Finance extended the time-frame for the tabling of the annual reports and financial statements of departments and institutions, exempting Executive Authorities from tabling these documents within six-months after the end of the financial year.

Instead, Executive Authorities must table the annual reports within two months after the normal deadline, that is, by the end of November.

These timeframes have been extended owing to the lockdown imposed to curb the Covid-19 pandemic.
1.5 The work of portfolio committees has also been disrupted, as they have been unable to finalise their BRRR without sight of the audited information and financial statements contained in the annual reports.

1.6 Nonetheless, committees met in October to conduct a preliminary assessment of departmental performance and expenditure for the relevant period, making use of the information that was available at the time.

The quarterly reports of departments also formed part of this interim process.

1.3.
1.3.

The Committee oversees the Office of the Chief Justice (OCJ), which was established in 2010 primarily to support the Chief Justice in the execution of his/her administrative and judicial powers and duties as Head of the Judiciary and Head of the Constitutional Court.

The transfer of administrative functions and identified staff attached to the Superior Courts from the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to the OCJ commenced on 1 October 2014.

1.4.
1.4.

On 1 April 2015, the OCJ became a fully-fledged Department with its own Vote.

The administration for the Superior Courts, Judicial Services Commission (JSC) and South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI) were transferred to the OCJ, together with the budget and 2 124 personnel, from the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development.

The funds for judges’ salaries were also transferred to the new Vote.

2.

Process followed 2.1.


On 13 October 2020, the Committee engaged with the OCJ on its unaudited financial and non- financial performance for the Fourth Quarter of 2019/20 and the First Quarter of 2020/21.

2.2.

Following the tabling of the OCJ’s annual report for 2019/20, the Committee engaged first with the Auditor-General South Africa on the OCJ’s audit outcome for 2019/20 and then with the OCJ on its annual report for 2019/20.

Both meetings took place on 17 November 2020.

2.3.
2.3.

This Report, therefore, encompasses and reflects on all of these engagements.

2.4.

Copies of the presentations are available from the committee secretariat.

3.

Strategic overview 3.1.

Strengthening judicial governance and the rule of law is considered vital to further the transformative promise of our Constitution.

The NDP recommends a judiciary-led independent court administration.
To strengthen judicial governance, the NDP also identifies the need for a strategy to improve the quality of judges through appointments and the scaling up of judicial training.

3.2.

The intention when establishing the OCJ as a national department within the public service was that this would be the first phase towards an independent judiciary-led court administration system to realise fully the Judiciary’s institutional independence in line with the Constitution, 1996.

3.3.
3.3.

The Constitution Seventeenth Amendment Act, 2013, affirms the Chief Justice as head of the Judiciary responsible for establishing and monitoring the norms and standards for the exercise of judicial functions of all courts.

The Superior Courts Act, 2013, establishes a legislative 3 125 framework for the Chief Justice to exercise his/her judicial leadership supported by the OCJ and provides for the delegation of certain functions flowing from the Act to the OCJ.

3.4.
3.4.

The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development continues to support the administration of the Lower/Magistrate’s courts.

Further, until the legislative framework for the Magistrates’ Courts is overhauled to transform these courts in line with the Superior Courts Act, 2013, certain shared services (for example, tools of trade and security services) are provided by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development.

3.5.
3.5.

The OCJ tabled its Strategic Plan for 2019-2024 and Annual Performance Plan 2020/21 in Parliament on 17 April 2020.

As the tabled plans were developed before the COVID-19 pandemic, the OCJ has since reviewed the planning documents to integrate the impact of COVID-19.

The revised plans were re-tabled in Parliament on 8 July 2020.

3.6.
3.6.

The OCJ contributes to the National Development Plan’s (NDP) call for strengthened judicial governance and the rule of law, and also to ensuring an efficient and effective criminal justice system by: • Accelerating reforms to implement a judiciary-led court administration.

• Ensuring an efficient court system.

• Reducing court administration inefficiencies.

• Ensuring judicial accountability.

• Providing training to the judiciary though SAJEI.

3.7.
3.7.

The MTSF 2019-2024 acknowledges that the challenges of poverty, inequality and unemployment continue to hold back the achievement of South Africa’s national development.

This burden is disproportionately felt by the youth, women and people with disabilities.

In order to address these challenges, the MTSF identifies a number of priority areas.

Of these, the priorities ‘A capable, ethical and developmental state’ and ‘Social cohesion and safe communities’ are of particular relevance.

3.8.
3.8.

In addition, the lack of access to resources and opportunity for Women, Youth and People with Disabilities are identified as cross-cutting, requiring a variety of interventions, including legislative amendments.

4 126 3.9.

Under the priority, ‘A capable, ethical and developmental state’, performance within the public service is acknowledged to be uneven with capacity challenges at all levels of government.

The MTSF, therefore, highlights the need for: • A capable and honest government.
• Improved leadership, governance and accountability.

• Professional, meritocratic and ethical public administration.

• A social compact and engagement with key stakeholders.

• The mainstreaming of gender, empowerment of youth and people with disabilities.

3.10.

The MTSF identifies the need to develop a unified approach between the three arms of State (Legislature, Executive and Judiciary) to fast-track outcomes.
In this regard, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is to lead the development of a social compact between the three arms by 2021, which is to be implemented by 2024.

3.11.

The MTSF identifies the need for a programme to prevent and fight corruption in government, which the Department of Justice leads together with the Department of Planning Monitoring and Evaluation and the Public Service Commission.

3.12.
3.12.

Under the priority ‘Social cohesion and safe communities’, the necessity for an effective and modernised criminal justice system is identified.

In this regard, the IJS programme is key.

3.13.

Aligning MTSF priorities to plans, the OCJ will contribute as follows: Table 1: OCJ planned contribution to achieving MTSF 2019-2024 priorities MTSF PRIORITY PLANNED CONTRIBUTION A capable, ethical and • Address fraud and corruption.

developmental State • Promote an ethical culture.


• Integrate Batho Pele principles into the Department’s institutional culture.

• Adhere to corporate governance principles, such as leadership, strategy and performance, risk and stakeholder management.

• Improve court operations systems.

5 127 MTSF PRIORITY PLANNED CONTRIBUTION • Modernise court processes and systems.
Economic Implement equity programmes targeting employment and empowerment transformation and job of youth, women, and people with disabilities in both the recruitment and creation procurement processes.

Social cohesion and Ensure access to a safe and secure court environment and improving the safe communities integrity of court processes/ outcomes, as well as capacitating/ resourcing the courts in order for them to execute their mandate.

3.14.
3.14.

The OCJ has the following broad strategic outcome-orientated goals.

• Capacitating the Office of the Chief Justice by securing adequate human resources for it to carry out its mandate effectively.

• Providing administrative support to the Chief Justice in fulfilling his/her functions as Head of the Judiciary.

• Rendering effective and efficient administration and technical support to the Superior Courts.

4.

Financial performance 4.1.


The OCJ was allocated an annual budget of R2.3 billion in 2019/20 and is allocated R2.45 billion for 2020/21.

Notably, voted funds make up about 51% of the total allocation, while the direct charge for Judges’ salaries comprises almost 49% of the total allocation.
Table 2: Budget allocation for the OCJ per programme 2020 MTEF Programme Final MTEF Average Appropriation 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 Expenditure/ 2019/20 R ’million 217.4 898.8 R ’million Total 235.9 948.6 249.8 260.7 1 006.5 1 056.4 9.5% 38.9% Administration Superior Court Services 6 128 Programme Final MTEF Average Appropriation 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 Expenditure/ 2019/20 R ’million R ’million Total Judicial Education 81.4 75.3 79.6 81.2 3.2% and Support Subtotal Direct Charge: Judges’ Salaries 1 197.7 1 098.5 1 259.8 1 335.9 1398.3 1190.9 1 268.7 1 318.9 51.6% 48.4% Total 2 296.2 2 450.8 2 604.6 2 717.3 100% 4.2.
Financial performance 2019/20 Table 3: Expenditure 2019/20 per programme Programme Final Actual Variance R ’million 2019/20 2019/20 Expenditure Appropriation Expenditure (Over)/Under Administration Superior Court Services Judicial Education and Support Subtotal Direct Charge: Judges’ Salaries Total 217.4 898.8 81.4 1 197.7 1 098.5 211.0 857.7 65.1 1 133.9 1 051.7 6.4 41.1 16.3 63.8 46.8 2 296.2 2 185.6 110.6 4.2.1.
At programme level, the following is observed: • The Administration programme spent R211.0 million against the projected expenditure of R217.4 million, underspending by R6.4 million.

The underspending is ascribable to not filling funded vacancies due to natural attrition and underspending on payments for capital 7 129 assets because of computer equipment not being delivered on time as a result of international manufacturing plants closing due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
• The Superior Court Services programme spent R857.7 million against the projected expenditure of R898.8 million, underspending by R41 million.

The underspending was due to a higher than normal rate of natural attrition and savings from the implementation of the unified telecommunication systems and delayed delivery of ICT hardware due to the closing of international manufacturing plants as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
• The Judicial Education and Support programme spent R65.1 million against the projected expenditure of R81.4 million, underspending by R16.3 million.
The underspending relates to natural attrition and delays in filling of funded vacancies, saving realised on travel and substance as a result of the cancellation of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) sitting due to the COVID-19 pandemic, non-payment of legal costs due to pending court dates as well as the inability to upgrade the telecommunication equipment in the South African Judicial Education Institute (SAJEI) boardroom.

• Judges salaries.
• Judges salaries.

The expenditure on the statutory allocation was R1.051 billion against the final allocation of R1.098 billion which resulted in an underspending of R46.821 million.

The saving on the Judges’ salaries is due to the non-approval of a salary adjustment for the Judges which was projected for the financial year.

4.3.

Financial performance First Quarter 2020/21 4.3.1.


In the First Quarter of 2020/21, the OCJ spent R489.05 million against projected spending of R550.25 million (or 88.9%) including the direct charge (Judges’ salaries).

Overall underspending for the First Quarter was R61 million.

• The 2020/21 Quarter 1 expenditure of voted funds is 81.8% or R225.695 million against the planned budget of R275.966 million.

Underspending of voted funds was R50.3 million.


• The 2020/21 Quarter 1 expenditure of the direct charge was 96.1% or R263.354 million against the allocated budget of R274.288 million.

Underspending of the direct charge was R10.9 million.

8 130 4.3.2.

At programme level, underspending is observed in all three programmes: • The Administration programme spent R35.4 million against the projected expenditure of R50.2 million, underspending by R14.8 million.
• The Superior Court Services programme spent R184.6 million against the projected expenditure of R213.2 million, underspending by R28.6 million.

• The Judicial Education and Support programme spent R5.7 million against the projected expenditure of R12.6 million, underspending by R6.9 million.

4.3.3.

The explanation for the reported deviations is as follows: • Under Administration, the underspending is largely on ‘compensation of employees’ due to delayed implementation of the salary adjustment.
• Under Superior Court Services, the underspending relates to: Ø Compensation of employees due to delayed implementation of the salary adjustment.

Ø Fleet services due to lesser than projected usage of leased judges’ vehicles because of the COVID-19 lockdown regulations.

Ø Lesser than projected stationery bought as Superior Courts operate on a skeleton staff and some of the Judges and staff members are working remotely.
Ø Fewer than projected travelling by the Judges and officials due to nation-wide lockdown restrictions.

Ø Fewer than anticipated officials who resigned.

Ø Delayed delivery of the ICT hardware procured in bulk due to COVID-19 restrictions.

5.

Budget pressures 5.1.

The OCJ reports that the ‘Compensation of Employees’ budget is to be reduced by: • R258.681 million in 2021/22, of which R109.890 million is from the voted funds and R183.478 million is from the direct charges.
• R350.070 million in 2022/23, of which R148.974 million is from the voted funds and R255.236 million is from the direct charges.

5.2.

These cuts will have a negative impact on the OCJ in sustaining the currently filled staff establishment.

9 131 • The cut will compel the OCJ not to fill critical posts, which are part of the recently approved macro organizational structure and those which are vacant or become vacant during the MTEF period.
• The increase granted during the 2020 MTEF process, to capacitate the two courts in the Mpumalanga Division of the High Court has been reversed by the cut.

The OCJ has since made these appointments and will no longer be able to afford this expenditure.

5.3.
5.3.

The reductions will also adversely affect the OCJ in terms of its ability to deliver its core mandate, which is to support the Judiciary and Superior Courts, resulting in: • Increased case backlogs at Superior Courts (Main Seat; Local Seat & Circuit Courts).

• Scaled back training for Judicial Officers.

• • • Inability to provide sufficient witness administration.

Inability to provide sufficient translation services.

Inability to provide sufficient transcription services.

6.
6.

Non-financial performance 6.1.

The overall achievement of planned targets 2019/20 and First Quarter 2020/21 was as follows: Table 4: OCJ Overall non-financial performance 2019/20 and Quarter 1 2020/21 No.

of Targets 2018/19 2019/20 First Quarter Achieved Not achieved Total 18 2 20 Percentage achieved 90% 14 6 20 70% 2020/21 9 1 10 90% 6.2.

Reported key achievements for 2019/20 are as follows: • Unqualified audit outcome with no material findings for the 2018/19 Financial Year.
• The vacancy rate of 8.9%, which is below the 10% target set by DPSA.

• The official opening of the Mpumalanga Division of the High Court was part of the Government’s commitment to bring justice closer to the people.

• Implemented the Combined Assurance Plan in 24 Superior Courts.

10 132 • As part of court modernisation, the Judiciary, supported by the OCJ, piloted CaseLines solution in the Gauteng Division of the High Court.

• Implemented the Fraud Prevention Strategy in 24 Superior Courts.
• Conducted 115 skills-enhancing judicial education courses for Judicial Officers and aspiring Judicial Officers against a target of 80.

7.

Programme performance 2019/20 and First Quarter 2020/21 7.1 Programme 1: Administration 7.1.1.

The purpose of this programme is to provide strategic leadership, management and support services to the Department.
The programme consists of the following sub-programmes: • The Management sub-programme provides administrative, planning, monitoring, evaluation, performance reporting and risk management functions necessary to ensure effective functioning of the Department.

• The Corporate Services sub-programme provides integrated Human Resources Management (HRM), Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and security management support services to the Department.
• The Finance Administration sub-programme provides overall financial, asset and supply chain management services to the Judiciary and the Department.

• The Internal Audit sub-programme provides overall internal audit and risk management services to the Department and the Superior Courts.

• The Office Accommodation sub-programme provides for acquisition of office accommodation for the Department.

7.1.2.

The Administration programme met seven of 10 or 70% of planned targets for 2019/20.
Table 5: Administration: Selected performance 2019/20 Performance Indicator Performance 2019/20 ICT Master Systems Plan NOT ACHIEVED implemented over the MTEF Prioritised projects (e-filling project) of the ICT Master Systems Plan not rolled-out in 5 Superior Courts (a component 11 133 Performance Indicator Performance 2019/20 of the e-filing project (CaseLines) was piloted in 1 Superior Annual Performance Plan (APP) NOT ACHIEVED Court (Gauteng).)
tabled within prescribed timelines OCJ Annual Performance Plan (2020/21) not tabled in Parliament before the end of the financial year due to competing priorities as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Percentage of internal audit NOT ACHIEVED - 97% (30 of 31) projects completed in line with Compliance audit project was not completed due to COVID– the approved Annual Audit Plan.

19 lockdown restrictions 7.1.3.


In the First Quarter of 2020/21, the OCJ reports that the Administration programme met all 2 or 100% of the 2 planned targets for the quarter.

7.2 Programme 2: Superior Court Services 7.2.1 This programme provides judicial support and court administration services to the Superior Courts.
The programme consists of the following sub-programmes: • The Administration of Superior Courts sub-programme provides administrative and technical support to the Superior Courts, monitors the overall performance of the Superior Courts, and enhances judicial stakeholder relations.

• The Constitutional Court sub-programme funds the activities and operations of the Constitutional Court.

• The Supreme Court of Appeal sub-programme funds the activities and operations of the Supreme Court of Appeal.
• The High Courts’ sub-programme funds the activities and operations of the various high court divisions.

• The Specialized Courts sub-programme funds the activities and operations of the labour, land, electoral and competition courts.
7.2.2 The programme achieved three of the six or 50% planned targets for 2019/20: Table 6: Superior Court Services: Selected performance 2019/20 12 134 Performance indicators Performance 2019/20 Number of monitoring reports on Court Order Integrity Project 100% or 4/4 produced Percentage of default judgements finalised by Registrars NOT ACHIEVED Percentage of taxations of legal costs finalised each year NOT ACHIEVED 98% against a target of 100% (47 910 of 49 070) 99% against a target of 100% ( (46 315 of 46 850) 7.2.3 In the First Quarter of 2020/21, under the Superior Courts Services programme, the OCJ reports that it met all six of planned targets for the quarter.
7.3 Programme 3: Judicial Education and Support 7.3.1.

Judicial Education and Support provides education programmes to Judicial Officers, including policy development and research services for the optimal administration of justice.

7.3.2.

The programme has the following sub-programmes: • The South African Judicial Education Institute sub-programme funds the activities of the SAJEI to provide training for Judicial Officers.
• The Judicial Policy, Research and Support sub-programme funds the provision of advisory opinions on policy development and regulatory services to the Judiciary and the Department.

• The Judicial Service Commission sub-programme provides secretariat and administrative support services to the Judicial Service Commission to perform its constitutional and legislative mandates effectively.

13 135 7.3.3.

The programme met all four or 100% of planned targets for 2019/20.

7.3.4.
7.3.4.

In the First Quarter of 2020/21, the OCJ reports that it met 1 of 2 or 50% of the planned quarterly targets for the programme.

8.

Human resources 8.1.

At the end of 2019/20, the number of filled posts at the OCJ was 1 866 against an approved establishment of 2 047 posts.

The overall vacancy rate grew from 7.2% in 2018/19 to 8.8% in 2019/20.

However, this was still below the 10% target set by Department of Public Service and Administration for the year.

8.2.
8.2.

At the end of Quarter 1 of 2020/21, the post establishment reflected 2 115 approved posts, of which 1 893 were filled and 222 were vacant and funded.

The vacancy rate was at 10.5%, which is higher than the national target of 10%.

Of the 2 115 approved posts, 1 893 (89.5%) posts were filled.

9.

Audit outcome 9.1.

The OCJ received a clean audit opinion for 2019/20 for the third consecutive year.
(Since 2015/16, the OCJ has received an unqualified audit opinion and since 2017/18 has achieved a clean audit opinion.)

10.

BRRR 2019 observations 10.1.

The Committee made the following observations in the 2019 BRRR: • The Committee once more expressed its dissatisfaction about the difficulties it has in accessing the information that will allow it to properly measure how well the justice system is working, as much of the information related to court performance is located within the Judiciary.
The Committee noted that the South African Judiciary Annual Report 2018/19 is extremely valuable but there are gaps, particularly relating to the performance of the 14 136 lower courts.

The Committee acknowledged that the solution lies partly in the finalisation of the long overdue court administration model and expressed concern at the lack of progress towards finalising the policy.

• The Committee was given to understand that a Lower Courts Bill was at a very advanced stage.
• The Committee expressed support for the various initiatives to modernise our courts through court automation.

The Committee noted that the e-filing project, which forms part of the ICT Master Systems Plan, could not be piloted in 2018/1 but that the State Information and Technology Agency (SITA), who is the appointed service provider, had since provided the OCJ with a revised project plan.
The Committee expressed the intention to arrange a visit to Gauteng to see the CaseLines solution, which forms part of the e-filing project, as soon as the programme permitted.

• Committee was concerned about reports of inadequate security at courts.
As this is a shared function with the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, it requested the OCJ to engage with the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development to provide the Committee with a report relating to the provision of security at courts, including details of funding.

• The Committee acknowledged the OCJ’s good work in maintaining a clean audit outcome for the second consecutive year.
• The Committee looked forward to the tabling of the Judicial Services Commission’s report of its activities for 2018/19 in the near future.

• The Committee noted the Judiciary’s concern about the lack of wellness support offered to judicial officers, many of whom suffer extreme stress as a result of their presiding over traumatising cases.
The Committee agreed with the Judiciary that this is a work-related challenge and, therefore, required an institutional response in the form of a judicial wellness or stress management programme.

The Committee noted that the Judiciary is developing a programme or system to address this.

• The Committee agreed with the Judiciary’s view that addressing gender-based violence requires an integrated approach from all key stakeholders.

• 11.
• 11.

Committee’s observations • The Committee makes the following observations: 15 137 11.1.

Transfer of functions to the OCJ.

The Committee notes the lack of progress regarding the finalisation of a court administration model that will see the transfer of functions presently still undertaken by the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development (such as security services at the courts) to the OCJ.

11.2.

Court modernisation.


The Committee supports the various initiatives to modernise our courts and is given to understand that, as part of the e-filing project, ‘CaseLines’ is being piloted at the High Courts in Gauteng.

The Committee will engage with the OCJ to arrange a briefing on the pilot, as soon as the programme permits.

11.3.

Security.

The Committee notes the cybersecurity breach at the OCJ in September 2020.
The Committee understands the Secretary-General’s reluctance to provide more detail at that stage as to do so may jeopardise the investigation and expose the OCJ’s systems further.

An Internal Audit report, however, lists inadequacies in ICT security and user access management, as well as ICT operational inefficiencies as among the areas of concern and the Audit Committee confirmed that ICT is an area of weakness at the OCJ.

11.4.

Growing case backlogs.


The Committee is extremely concerned by the case backlogs and the threat that these pose to our judicial system.

The crisis has highlighted just how inefficient court processes are and the extreme need to modernise and digitise the courts but it is unrealistic to expect that this will be achieved overnight.
The Committee notes that the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development has developed a case backlog plan with the relevant stakeholders and understands that there was a consultation process with the Judiciary in this regard.

At this stage, it is not clear to the Committee whether implementation of the plan is progressing well but reports that court hours have declined further suggests otherwise.
Unfortunately, future budget cuts that will affect the compensation of employees’ budgets of departments, in particular, are likely to see the case backlogs increase further.

This is an area of concern that the Committee would like to engage the Judiciary on when it meets with it.

11.5.

Budget reductions.

The Committee notes the budget reductions that are proposed and is concerned that these reductions will contribute to the growing case backlogs in our courts.
The OCJ has indicated that its compensation of employees’ budget will be seriously affected by the proposed budget reductions and, among others, this will mean that it will not be able to fill 16 138 posts.

The reductions will not only contribute to further case backlogs but will compromise the OCJ’s ability to provide support to the OCJ.

11.6.

Youth employment and the employment of persons with disabilities.
The Committee welcomes the OCJ’s commitment to youth employment (it has actively pursued the recruitment of youth and is well ahead of government’s target of 30%).

However, the OCJ is faring less well when it comes to employing persons with disabilities.

The Committee is pleased to learn that the OCJ intends entering into beneficial partnerships to attract more staff from this category of people and will monitor progress in this regard.

11.7.

Audit outcome.


The Committee commends the OCJ on maintaining its clean audit opinion, noting the Auditor-General and Audit Committee’s comments on the high standard of governance at the OCJ.

The Audit Committee identified ICT and human resources as being two areas of weakness but also that there are strong risk management processes in place.

11.8.

Judicial Services Commission report.

The Committee notes the tabling of the Judicial Services Commission’s report of its activities for 2018/19.

12.
12.

Appreciation 12.1.

The Committee thanks the Minister and Deputy Minister, the Secretary-General and the staff of the OCJ for their assistance in this process.

12.2.

The Committee also wishes to thank the Auditor General South Africa for the support it provided to the Committee.

Report to be considered 17 139